Not that anyone, especially the idiots that run the closed shop that is South Ribble CLP, nor the morons at HQ, will be bothered but I've decided to leave the Labour Party.
Was a hard decision to make but I am sick of the idiots in control and with no party mechanism in place to deal with complaints or make change I've decided enough is enough.
I'll still be critical of the Tories but I am at a stage were I really do feel that Labour simply isn't the party it is / pretends to be with the vast majority of the hierarchy simply in it for themselves or their own agendas.
While it used to be the case that I saw my membership fee as a donation to help the Party to continue with the hope that an 'up and comer' would rise through the ranks, bring sense to its politics and the direction it is taking I just see it now as a way to fund the policies and ideologies and agendas of the few, who care little about anyone else, as long as they are OK and it's not something I feel comfortable with doing any more.
Sorry folks, I wish those who do care and do their best the very best of luck with what they are trying to achieve but I've had enough so it's goodbye from me....
Friday, 6 December 2013
Tuesday, 6 August 2013
Answers to Labour's Better Politics Questionaire via People's Politics
Better Politics via People's Politics
Politics:
Answers to Questions 1-3:
The first thing to acknowledge about Politics is that it works but, sadly thanks to how Labour currently operates, it is badly broken and is why Party reform is needed.
The party runs at the behest of the shouty minority which will be seen by the political elite as a good thing but in reality is seen by the majority as what makes Politics not work for them.
Not only do the shouty minority succeed because they know how the political system works, in most cases the political elite are members of or supporters of these minority groups and can steer debates and in worse case scenarios the entire party political machine, so that their beliefs and or agendas can be accommodated or achieved, even if much more pressing matters are the majorities major concern.
In losing focus on the agendas of the many ‘we’ have lost support and sadly as ‘we’ are now backtracking on almost all policy decisions made the arrogance and contempt ‘we’ have shown to the majority of the electorate will be remembered and in all probability used as a tool by our opposition at the next election.
The worse aspect of this will be the limited achievements, while massive to the shouty minority, will also be claimed to be achieved during our opposition’s terms in Government, even if the shouty minority will try to claim the moral victory.
Most outside the political bubble see results, unless they are u-turns as things done by the Government of the day.
While we must always be seen as the enablers, tolerant and understanding of the shouty minorities concerns we must ensure that we are the party of ALL and be seen as not just willing but capable of being completely able to represent all which includes being representative of all.
Politicians:
Answers to Questions 1-4:
A Politician is, or at least should be, the voice of the people who elected them but in far too many cases they become the voice of themselves or, as already mentioned, the mouthpiece or publicists of the shouty minority.
Most Labour MP’s in particular, lose sight of their grass roots, mostly due to an understandable rise in pay and or living conditions but a lot, especially the career politicians appear to lose all empathy with those who elected them.
Brown’s contempt shown, in Rochdale and his sheer ignorance towards ‘pressing concerns’ underlined a viewpoint and as most attempts to engage with members never mind constituents just become tick box exercises for the Party despite all the noise of the publicity machine, it is little wonder there is no faith in the system.
The party needs to be considerable more active in the communities it claims to represent, not seen but seen to do, resolve or enable and its first port of call has to be improvements on its ability to listen.
The electorate said NO to AV yet we still insist on using it to recruit people.
All women shortlists are, away from the political bubble, seen as nothing more than a farcical switch from the inequality towards women to inequality towards men.
Considerable work also needs to be done on the removal of closed shops within CLP’s.
It is ridiculous to have groups that supposedly represent the party who alienate anyone who is not willing for example to not campaign in some words deemed safe and not worth bothering with just so resources that could be used in them can be used to maintain a closed shop.
CLP’s need to be a lot more open, governed by a proper complaints / discipline body and have a welcoming approach, perhaps even having new member induction meetings ahead of a thrust into Branch and CLP meetings and a pick it up as they go along mentality.
Open, honest, be seen to do and not just at elections times, caring and representative of those who elected them have to become priorities and when the system is fit for purpose people will join it in the same way they will let Politicians know that there are issues they want dealing with when they know the system will work for them.
Democratic participation:
Questions 1-4:
I vote for the same reason I am taking part in this inquiry exercise which is because I believe without giving voice you cannot really ‘moan’, even if knowing that most if not all will fall on deliberately deaf ears.
I also believe that in doing so, rather like this exercise, after taking part should things not change, get ignored etc. I can hold those who claimed to "want to know" accountable for not listening.
Brown was told that the economic crisis would happen but did nothing.
Burnham was told there are problems within our NHS but did nothing.
Vaz, in his role as Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, along with all Home Secretaries since 1998 has been told that there is a crisis in fulfilling our community safety strategies and there key objectives not being met but did (and in Vaz’s case still does) nothing.
As someone who has chaired community groups I know for a fact that people will tell you if things are wrong, they will, if they can, help find solutions and they will if they have faith allow things to be run on their behalf but if they fail disengagement, lack of trust and belief are natural reactions and while some failures can be mitigated against if the failures are down to arrogance, ignorance, contempt or simply not listening they are reactions which are immensely difficult to overcome.
The best way to show politics works is as already mentioned for it to be seen to work for ALL.
Parliament:
Questions 1-2:
Parliament is extremely relevant to everyone’s life which is why those in it should not be permitted to set their own agendas, once they become able to sit in it.
Sadly PMQ’s are its biggest downfall and shows everything that is wrong with the system it operates in.
This submission mentions arrogance and contempt on a number of occasions. There is no better example of it at PMQ’s when MP’s walk in talking and make considerable noise while others are performing their elected duties.
The frankly pathetic ‘Punch and Judy’ debates and how they are shouted down by ‘adults’ shows everything that is wrong with it, as much as the complete ignorance shown to ‘colleagues’ while leaving the chamber as they attempt to debate issues.
Politicians are supposedly diplomats they should act as them.
Summary:
I have little doubt that some will read this and bracket it racist, homophobic, sexist or some other nonsense and if you have come to this conclusion then you are very much part of the problem with our politics.
I don’t blame the shouty minority for doing what they do, who wouldn’t use what they can to achieve their aims, I blame those who enabled them to achieve at the expense of others.
Politics works, if the panel are looking for an example that shows that it does then there is no better one than the removal of Abu Hamza.
Unfortunately Labour in its wisdom has introduced a mindset and policies which undermine it and in turn have created the belief for the many that it is fundamentally broken.
‘We’ lost the last election because of ‘our’ arrogance, contempt and refusal to listen the Tories, or Coalition as they prefer to be called didn’t win it, yet, even now, ‘we’ still can’t recognise ‘our’ flaws and choose to use phrases like "we did things to fast".
We have enabled the shouty minority and ‘think tanks’ to create the party we have and while some reading this (if it is read) may be in a position to make change little if anything will be done because there is no accountability to the shouty minority when ‘we’ fail.
Politics:
Answers to Questions 1-3:
The first thing to acknowledge about Politics is that it works but, sadly thanks to how Labour currently operates, it is badly broken and is why Party reform is needed.
The party runs at the behest of the shouty minority which will be seen by the political elite as a good thing but in reality is seen by the majority as what makes Politics not work for them.
Not only do the shouty minority succeed because they know how the political system works, in most cases the political elite are members of or supporters of these minority groups and can steer debates and in worse case scenarios the entire party political machine, so that their beliefs and or agendas can be accommodated or achieved, even if much more pressing matters are the majorities major concern.
In losing focus on the agendas of the many ‘we’ have lost support and sadly as ‘we’ are now backtracking on almost all policy decisions made the arrogance and contempt ‘we’ have shown to the majority of the electorate will be remembered and in all probability used as a tool by our opposition at the next election.
The worse aspect of this will be the limited achievements, while massive to the shouty minority, will also be claimed to be achieved during our opposition’s terms in Government, even if the shouty minority will try to claim the moral victory.
Most outside the political bubble see results, unless they are u-turns as things done by the Government of the day.
While we must always be seen as the enablers, tolerant and understanding of the shouty minorities concerns we must ensure that we are the party of ALL and be seen as not just willing but capable of being completely able to represent all which includes being representative of all.
Politicians:
Answers to Questions 1-4:
A Politician is, or at least should be, the voice of the people who elected them but in far too many cases they become the voice of themselves or, as already mentioned, the mouthpiece or publicists of the shouty minority.
Most Labour MP’s in particular, lose sight of their grass roots, mostly due to an understandable rise in pay and or living conditions but a lot, especially the career politicians appear to lose all empathy with those who elected them.
Brown’s contempt shown, in Rochdale and his sheer ignorance towards ‘pressing concerns’ underlined a viewpoint and as most attempts to engage with members never mind constituents just become tick box exercises for the Party despite all the noise of the publicity machine, it is little wonder there is no faith in the system.
The party needs to be considerable more active in the communities it claims to represent, not seen but seen to do, resolve or enable and its first port of call has to be improvements on its ability to listen.
The electorate said NO to AV yet we still insist on using it to recruit people.
All women shortlists are, away from the political bubble, seen as nothing more than a farcical switch from the inequality towards women to inequality towards men.
Considerable work also needs to be done on the removal of closed shops within CLP’s.
It is ridiculous to have groups that supposedly represent the party who alienate anyone who is not willing for example to not campaign in some words deemed safe and not worth bothering with just so resources that could be used in them can be used to maintain a closed shop.
CLP’s need to be a lot more open, governed by a proper complaints / discipline body and have a welcoming approach, perhaps even having new member induction meetings ahead of a thrust into Branch and CLP meetings and a pick it up as they go along mentality.
Open, honest, be seen to do and not just at elections times, caring and representative of those who elected them have to become priorities and when the system is fit for purpose people will join it in the same way they will let Politicians know that there are issues they want dealing with when they know the system will work for them.
Democratic participation:
Questions 1-4:
I vote for the same reason I am taking part in this inquiry exercise which is because I believe without giving voice you cannot really ‘moan’, even if knowing that most if not all will fall on deliberately deaf ears.
I also believe that in doing so, rather like this exercise, after taking part should things not change, get ignored etc. I can hold those who claimed to "want to know" accountable for not listening.
Brown was told that the economic crisis would happen but did nothing.
Burnham was told there are problems within our NHS but did nothing.
Vaz, in his role as Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, along with all Home Secretaries since 1998 has been told that there is a crisis in fulfilling our community safety strategies and there key objectives not being met but did (and in Vaz’s case still does) nothing.
As someone who has chaired community groups I know for a fact that people will tell you if things are wrong, they will, if they can, help find solutions and they will if they have faith allow things to be run on their behalf but if they fail disengagement, lack of trust and belief are natural reactions and while some failures can be mitigated against if the failures are down to arrogance, ignorance, contempt or simply not listening they are reactions which are immensely difficult to overcome.
The best way to show politics works is as already mentioned for it to be seen to work for ALL.
Parliament:
Questions 1-2:
Parliament is extremely relevant to everyone’s life which is why those in it should not be permitted to set their own agendas, once they become able to sit in it.
Sadly PMQ’s are its biggest downfall and shows everything that is wrong with the system it operates in.
This submission mentions arrogance and contempt on a number of occasions. There is no better example of it at PMQ’s when MP’s walk in talking and make considerable noise while others are performing their elected duties.
The frankly pathetic ‘Punch and Judy’ debates and how they are shouted down by ‘adults’ shows everything that is wrong with it, as much as the complete ignorance shown to ‘colleagues’ while leaving the chamber as they attempt to debate issues.
Politicians are supposedly diplomats they should act as them.
Summary:
I have little doubt that some will read this and bracket it racist, homophobic, sexist or some other nonsense and if you have come to this conclusion then you are very much part of the problem with our politics.
I don’t blame the shouty minority for doing what they do, who wouldn’t use what they can to achieve their aims, I blame those who enabled them to achieve at the expense of others.
Politics works, if the panel are looking for an example that shows that it does then there is no better one than the removal of Abu Hamza.
Unfortunately Labour in its wisdom has introduced a mindset and policies which undermine it and in turn have created the belief for the many that it is fundamentally broken.
‘We’ lost the last election because of ‘our’ arrogance, contempt and refusal to listen the Tories, or Coalition as they prefer to be called didn’t win it, yet, even now, ‘we’ still can’t recognise ‘our’ flaws and choose to use phrases like "we did things to fast".
We have enabled the shouty minority and ‘think tanks’ to create the party we have and while some reading this (if it is read) may be in a position to make change little if anything will be done because there is no accountability to the shouty minority when ‘we’ fail.
Sunday, 14 July 2013
Information given to Andy Burnham when Health Secretary 13th march 2010
A lot is being said at the moment about the NHS and Andy Burnham.
Below is an email I sent to the PA of my MP at the time on NHS issues:
Sent: 13 March 2010
16:34
To: BENNISON, Andy
Subject: Re: Andy Burnham
To: BENNISON, Andy
Subject: Re: Andy Burnham
Hi
Andy
As discussed at
meeting with David and Andy Burnham
The points I have to
raise with regards to my hospital treatment which Andy has asked that David
write to him direct about are as follows:
Lack of nursing
care, especially at night, when bed side alarms where not answered for at times
half an hour.
The concern with
that is that when I was returned to bed after surgery, I was not given my alarm
which was positioned on my left hand side and out of reach and ended up asking
another patient to press theirs for me.
Because I required
the nurse during the day for pain which was treated with morpheme and was in
turn given my alarm after it I didn't need it at night but could have had the
need very easily.
Prior to getting the alarm when I
was feeling sick and I ended up having to struggle out of bed and use the ward
toilet to be sick in. (My arm was paralyzed at the
time).
Also and while not an alarm
pressing issue I was having to drink water direct from a jug because I could
not manage to pour it and nobody was around to do it for
me.
I also overheard a
nurse state that she hadn't had time to fill any bedside paperwork in so was
doing the full shifts next day.
The bedding was
dirty.
I also must raise,
at Andy's request, the issue of the significant amount of equipment left on or
on standby that was not being used.
I would also like to take the
opportunity to mention broken entertainment equipment (TV/Radio) whose service
was subscribed to but unable to be used.
The solution to deal with this was
a) not have the service as was the case of the patient opposite me b) Switch the
handset with a current empty bed which was done in my case but only after
figuring out that the handset was faulty.
Most of the issues
seemed to be very much about staffing levels and when a nurse was present they
were always helpful but the issues, especially about the bedside alarms which
patients in the ward prior to my attendance said was a regular thing, need to be
addressed.
Regards
Andy
The
email was sent to Andy (the PA) at the behest of Andy Burnham who I
spoke to face to face, raising the same subjects at the MP's campaign
launch.
Saturday, 1 June 2013
Some thoughts on the EDL
In light of the recent murder of a young soldier on our streets the group with 3 letters has once again raised it head in protest and has, as per usual, been attacked from all sides for doing it.
The hierarchy of the this group are the racist morons portrayed but the manner of the attacks on them by people who feel they are a lot better than those with concerns about those who seek to butcher individuals on our streets, in the name of their religion, raises some questions including:
Why is it that the 'good folk' who protest against cuts are not outraged about cuts to anti-terror funds in what is being described as a 'low risk borough'?
Why is it that social media can be monitored and used as a tool that leads to the arrest of people protesting yet the authorities can not arrest those spouting the same type of venomous hatred, in front of their eyes, outside a mosque or on our streets towards our service men and women when returning to our country?
Why is selected history used to ridicule the groups with three letters when history shows that even people like Emily Davidson resorted to using violence (and I am not condoning it) because her voice wasn't being heard, in the same way the supporters of the groups with 3 letters believe their voices are not being heard?
Why isn't 'know to us' not 'dealt with by us' in terms of Why is it that a country like Kenya can deport it's criminals (as they see them) yet the UK can't?
and
If education is the answer to terrorists why do those calling for it feel it acceptable to exchange bottle tosses with 'morons'?
The groups with three letters are mostly thugs who, if they didn't have the outlet of these protest, would probably be at football stadiums etc. attempting to cause trouble and their knowledge of history and their use of the 2nd World War, in particular, is to be frank revolting but another question that needs answering is where do people with concerns, even hatred towards some members of a religion go to get their voices heard.
When some are saying it's racism to attack a religion not a race are the sheep grazing on the utopia of multiculturalism doing themselves justice, especially when even the 'great leaders' are acknowledging its problems or is their automatic contempt blinding them and as much to blame for the likes of the group with three letters feeling the need to exist as the terrorist, who goes around hacking soldiers to bits, feels the need to commit murder?
The hierarchy of the this group are the racist morons portrayed but the manner of the attacks on them by people who feel they are a lot better than those with concerns about those who seek to butcher individuals on our streets, in the name of their religion, raises some questions including:
Why is it that the 'good folk' who protest against cuts are not outraged about cuts to anti-terror funds in what is being described as a 'low risk borough'?
Why is it that social media can be monitored and used as a tool that leads to the arrest of people protesting yet the authorities can not arrest those spouting the same type of venomous hatred, in front of their eyes, outside a mosque or on our streets towards our service men and women when returning to our country?
Why is selected history used to ridicule the groups with three letters when history shows that even people like Emily Davidson resorted to using violence (and I am not condoning it) because her voice wasn't being heard, in the same way the supporters of the groups with 3 letters believe their voices are not being heard?
Why isn't 'know to us' not 'dealt with by us' in terms of Why is it that a country like Kenya can deport it's criminals (as they see them) yet the UK can't?
and
If education is the answer to terrorists why do those calling for it feel it acceptable to exchange bottle tosses with 'morons'?
The groups with three letters are mostly thugs who, if they didn't have the outlet of these protest, would probably be at football stadiums etc. attempting to cause trouble and their knowledge of history and their use of the 2nd World War, in particular, is to be frank revolting but another question that needs answering is where do people with concerns, even hatred towards some members of a religion go to get their voices heard.
When some are saying it's racism to attack a religion not a race are the sheep grazing on the utopia of multiculturalism doing themselves justice, especially when even the 'great leaders' are acknowledging its problems or is their automatic contempt blinding them and as much to blame for the likes of the group with three letters feeling the need to exist as the terrorist, who goes around hacking soldiers to bits, feels the need to commit murder?
Saturday, 27 April 2013
An Open Letter to Tom Watson MP
Dear Tom
I was deeply saddened to read your tweets this morning referring to the actions of the Labour councillor in my ward who, while campaigning on the parties behalf, feels that is acceptable to deliver party election communications, which I presume are to assist the electorate to make an informed choice about who they should vote for, to certain houses while (deliberately in my case) ignoring others.
I was in particular extremely frustrated by your comment:
tom_watson @tom_watson :
@APFaz This being a free country, the candidate is entitled to talk to who s/he wants.
I was deeply saddened to read your tweets this morning referring to the actions of the Labour councillor in my ward who, while campaigning on the parties behalf, feels that is acceptable to deliver party election communications, which I presume are to assist the electorate to make an informed choice about who they should vote for, to certain houses while (deliberately in my case) ignoring others.
I was in particular extremely frustrated by your comment:
tom_watson
I know politicians (of all types) believe they are better than most and that attempting to be clever is a particular mindset deemed appropriate and acceptable in the arenas of the political elite but that comment, especially when it came after my asking why she was walking past some doors and not delivering leaflets to all, is why I feel you should perhaps consider your role as campaigns coordinator for the Labour Party.
You know full well Tom that I asked why she was walking past some doors and not delivering to all, not why was she not door knocking and talking to those she wants to vote for the party which, although one would assume a campaign manager would also want that done, is a completely different thing so to try and imply that it down to some democratic right, not just utter incompetence by a closed shop endorsed by an inept hierarchy, is, to be be frank, completely stupid.
People have the right to know who is standing for them Tom, they have the right to know what their policies are or will be if elected and if you are going to quote democratic rights you should see and know that to be true.
If you can't accept these democratic rights then, as mentioned and with the greatest of respect you probably should consider the campaign position you currently hold.
Regards
Andy
Saturday, 13 April 2013
Some thought on Mrs Thatcher
Although more a teenager than child because of the innocence lost I will always class myself as one of Thatcher's children.
I didn't want to do this post for the very simple reason that I completely despise the woman and thought it would be hard without speaking ill of the dead.
As far as I am concerned their should be no celebrating that an elderly women has passed away, the time to celebrate was when she left office (which I did) and to be brutally frank those who did are nothing more than idiots, speaking for nobody but themselves and I won't even get started on the prats who chose to damage their communities, in celebration of a person passing because of "the damage she did" to their communities.
However in light the sheer amount of crap I've been reading about the women, from those who 'loved her' to those who loathed her I had to.
Be warned I pull no punches, those of a sincere leaning to the left, won't like what I have to say, Labour members, of which I am one, probably won't and the Tories won't either.
Although I got into politics 'properly' because of problems here (a long story I'll avoid in this post) Mrs Thatcher was the reason why I chose Labour, but in recent years and despite still being a member, I am at a stage where I am not sure what my political leanings are, as such.
In my view she became elected for no other reason than the idiot left being as it was, a necessary Trade Union movement being far to powerful, there was a Government in place that just weren't listening to the vast majority of the very people who it was supposedly the voice of and on the whole the nation had had enough of it.
I know I was completely sick of power cuts and strikes, which while being broadcast by the Unions as being in member interests, they just weren't.
There were even times when I thought it only had to rain in the wrong direction and someone would be out with the natural "we support our brothers and sisters" domino effect kicking in which in our household, with my Dad as a Union man, meant no money or at lot less money coming in that week and in turn all of its consequences.
So I lay the blame on the idiot far left for Mrs T being elected.
Blaming the idiot left for her being elected is one thing BUT blaming the idiot left fully for Mrs T going in the direction she did simply isn't possible, her motives were true Tory and while the Unions did probably need braking, something a lot in Labour knew had to be done but couldn't manage to do, the way she chose to put entire communities on the scrap heap to achieve her goals is what she will always be remembered for and despised for.
Thanks to the idiot far left Thatcher was given the tools to do her nasties but it was Thatcher and her Governments that thrived on the enjoyment of having them to do the evil that she did.
The scars of Mrs Thatcher will last for generations beyond mine and, being the shining mantra that she is to a man who in my opinion is worse than Mrs T in every way, Cameron will ensure that the divides she created will remain for his generation and future generations after it as well.
The idiot left failed this country, Thatcher destroyed huge parts of it, Cameron will try his best to ensure her work is completed and, given the opportunity, do his very best to go even further than even Mrs T would go but my biggest fear from all the crap I've been reading is the hierarchy of the Labour party doing at that they can to ensure if Call me Dave does get booted out the Tories will be back, with a mission statement of "you let them back in and this is what they did".
It's hard to bring David Milliband into this piece but the election of Ed as leader of the Labour party was wrong and because of him only becoming leader through his Union votes he will forever be tied to them and give the Tories their ammo of a "remember the 70's" campaign message which, while already being used by Call me Dave has only got more meaning with the passing of the 'Iron Lady' but, with all that said, even if David had become Leader Labour's message would have been extremely hard to get across because most of the social injustices that effected the majority, like housing in particular, were never fixed in all the time 'we' were in Government, a Government that David (and Ed) were a part of, when it was so obvious that it should have been.
'Our' not listening is what got Call me Dave's Tories (coalition as they prefer) in and as we are seeing history isn't just repeating itself, Cameron is doing his very best to go further than Mrs T even could.
The only good thing for the Labour party is that Call me Dave hasn't learned from Mrs Thatchers mistakes, if he had recognised the best way to achieve is with compassion, not choosing sweeping targets but those who need targeting. If he did 2015 may see another Tory turn in office and not the end of his Government which I hope it will be.
I didn't want to do this post for the very simple reason that I completely despise the woman and thought it would be hard without speaking ill of the dead.
As far as I am concerned their should be no celebrating that an elderly women has passed away, the time to celebrate was when she left office (which I did) and to be brutally frank those who did are nothing more than idiots, speaking for nobody but themselves and I won't even get started on the prats who chose to damage their communities, in celebration of a person passing because of "the damage she did" to their communities.
However in light the sheer amount of crap I've been reading about the women, from those who 'loved her' to those who loathed her I had to.
Be warned I pull no punches, those of a sincere leaning to the left, won't like what I have to say, Labour members, of which I am one, probably won't and the Tories won't either.
Although I got into politics 'properly' because of problems here (a long story I'll avoid in this post) Mrs Thatcher was the reason why I chose Labour, but in recent years and despite still being a member, I am at a stage where I am not sure what my political leanings are, as such.
In my view she became elected for no other reason than the idiot left being as it was, a necessary Trade Union movement being far to powerful, there was a Government in place that just weren't listening to the vast majority of the very people who it was supposedly the voice of and on the whole the nation had had enough of it.
I know I was completely sick of power cuts and strikes, which while being broadcast by the Unions as being in member interests, they just weren't.
There were even times when I thought it only had to rain in the wrong direction and someone would be out with the natural "we support our brothers and sisters" domino effect kicking in which in our household, with my Dad as a Union man, meant no money or at lot less money coming in that week and in turn all of its consequences.
So I lay the blame on the idiot far left for Mrs T being elected.
Blaming the idiot left for her being elected is one thing BUT blaming the idiot left fully for Mrs T going in the direction she did simply isn't possible, her motives were true Tory and while the Unions did probably need braking, something a lot in Labour knew had to be done but couldn't manage to do, the way she chose to put entire communities on the scrap heap to achieve her goals is what she will always be remembered for and despised for.
Thanks to the idiot far left Thatcher was given the tools to do her nasties but it was Thatcher and her Governments that thrived on the enjoyment of having them to do the evil that she did.
The scars of Mrs Thatcher will last for generations beyond mine and, being the shining mantra that she is to a man who in my opinion is worse than Mrs T in every way, Cameron will ensure that the divides she created will remain for his generation and future generations after it as well.
The idiot left failed this country, Thatcher destroyed huge parts of it, Cameron will try his best to ensure her work is completed and, given the opportunity, do his very best to go even further than even Mrs T would go but my biggest fear from all the crap I've been reading is the hierarchy of the Labour party doing at that they can to ensure if Call me Dave does get booted out the Tories will be back, with a mission statement of "you let them back in and this is what they did".
It's hard to bring David Milliband into this piece but the election of Ed as leader of the Labour party was wrong and because of him only becoming leader through his Union votes he will forever be tied to them and give the Tories their ammo of a "remember the 70's" campaign message which, while already being used by Call me Dave has only got more meaning with the passing of the 'Iron Lady' but, with all that said, even if David had become Leader Labour's message would have been extremely hard to get across because most of the social injustices that effected the majority, like housing in particular, were never fixed in all the time 'we' were in Government, a Government that David (and Ed) were a part of, when it was so obvious that it should have been.
'Our' not listening is what got Call me Dave's Tories (coalition as they prefer) in and as we are seeing history isn't just repeating itself, Cameron is doing his very best to go further than Mrs T even could.
The only good thing for the Labour party is that Call me Dave hasn't learned from Mrs Thatchers mistakes, if he had recognised the best way to achieve is with compassion, not choosing sweeping targets but those who need targeting. If he did 2015 may see another Tory turn in office and not the end of his Government which I hope it will be.
Tuesday, 9 April 2013
Some thoughts on Paris Brown
As someone who was but has absolutely no pride in saying they were a complete numpty as a teen and at 46 is still paying the price for it I have a lot of empathy for Paris Brown but absolutely no sympathy for her current situation.
There is sadly thanks to social media a forum were the moronic can dish out their beliefs and opinions with the mindset that it's perfectly OK (idiots class it as free speech) and there is very little if any, apart from in Paris's case, consequence for doing it.
Social media has, in a way, become the local underpass wall for some to daub an insult on and it's about time that it stopped.
There will and are bleeding hearts supporting 'a child that has made a mistake and is now paying the consequence for it' but while it may be a price to high for supporters of Paris, if her losing the role she had stops even one troll then it probably is a price worth paying.
Paris isn't a typical teen, she's an example of some teens who, while growing in numbers thanks to things like Twitter, need to be taught that in life there is (or at least should be) consequence for actions taken.
Should the scars last for the rest of her life, like mine? No, if she's learnt a valuable lesson then she should be applauded for learning it but should she be left in a post to show that making the so-called mistakes of the type she has made won't mean anything then the answer to that question is also NO.
There is sadly thanks to social media a forum were the moronic can dish out their beliefs and opinions with the mindset that it's perfectly OK (idiots class it as free speech) and there is very little if any, apart from in Paris's case, consequence for doing it.
Social media has, in a way, become the local underpass wall for some to daub an insult on and it's about time that it stopped.
There will and are bleeding hearts supporting 'a child that has made a mistake and is now paying the consequence for it' but while it may be a price to high for supporters of Paris, if her losing the role she had stops even one troll then it probably is a price worth paying.
Paris isn't a typical teen, she's an example of some teens who, while growing in numbers thanks to things like Twitter, need to be taught that in life there is (or at least should be) consequence for actions taken.
Should the scars last for the rest of her life, like mine? No, if she's learnt a valuable lesson then she should be applauded for learning it but should she be left in a post to show that making the so-called mistakes of the type she has made won't mean anything then the answer to that question is also NO.
Friday, 22 March 2013
An example of poor lying
I've been having major problems with the local Labour Party and sadly, for reasons known only to itself, it's the kind of problem that the main Labour Party don't want to hear about.
I'll spare the full story of how this stage was reached, for no other reason than I get angry every time I do and with health not being it's best at the moment (yes I know it makes a refreshing change) it's probably best if I don't add more stress but basically the local Labour Ward Councillors have decided that a Residents Association has to be formed in the area and have been lying to residents to do it.
The whys and associated nonsense for this, as mentioned, I won't go into but basically it's something that isn't needed, when we have better and more powerful alternatives to use - the RA is basically just another tier of pointless bureaucracy we simply do not need and the fact they have been lying to try and get it in , despite all that just makes things worse.
Anyway, long story short, after strongly advising against the need for this RA, then opposing the need for this RA and then complaining about the introduction of this RA, as much as I was loathed to do it to my Tory MP because of the sheer ignorance of the Labour Party to deal with the lying ward councillors I received this letter:
In the letter the council claims "There is a local residents group which cover St Ambrose but it is not a Residents Association".
The letter also makes a few other false statements but that not in the least bit surprising, I've been battling with them for years about it but for the purpose of the blog post and reasons above won't bother with that either.
Below is a flyer delivered by our local Labour Ward Councillors:
It's there in black and white (colour if I've managed to do this correctly - I am hopeless with PC's)
Top of the flyer : St Ambrose Ward Residents Association.
So the thing that SRBC claims doesn't exist is being advertised by our Labour Ward Councillors as being in place.
Lesson I suppose is if you're going to lie to someone don't document it.
I'll spare the full story of how this stage was reached, for no other reason than I get angry every time I do and with health not being it's best at the moment (yes I know it makes a refreshing change) it's probably best if I don't add more stress but basically the local Labour Ward Councillors have decided that a Residents Association has to be formed in the area and have been lying to residents to do it.
The whys and associated nonsense for this, as mentioned, I won't go into but basically it's something that isn't needed, when we have better and more powerful alternatives to use - the RA is basically just another tier of pointless bureaucracy we simply do not need and the fact they have been lying to try and get it in , despite all that just makes things worse.
Anyway, long story short, after strongly advising against the need for this RA, then opposing the need for this RA and then complaining about the introduction of this RA, as much as I was loathed to do it to my Tory MP because of the sheer ignorance of the Labour Party to deal with the lying ward councillors I received this letter:
 | ||
| Letter from SRBC denying a Residents Association exists |
In the letter the council claims "There is a local residents group which cover St Ambrose but it is not a Residents Association".
The letter also makes a few other false statements but that not in the least bit surprising, I've been battling with them for years about it but for the purpose of the blog post and reasons above won't bother with that either.
Below is a flyer delivered by our local Labour Ward Councillors:
 |
| Flyer delivered by local Labour Ward Councillors |
Top of the flyer : St Ambrose Ward Residents Association.
So the thing that SRBC claims doesn't exist is being advertised by our Labour Ward Councillors as being in place.
Lesson I suppose is if you're going to lie to someone don't document it.
Monday, 28 January 2013
Progress Political Weekend Bursary Application
Below is the piece I sent as my application for the Progress Political weekend bursary.
The question as asked was: "What are the challenges an incoming Labour government will face in 2015 and what choices will it have to make?" and I won.
This isn't put here to brag, it's my view on what should happen but it's also put here to hopefully help anyone thinking of doing the same.
I live with dyslexia an while it was hard to do, if I can do it, apply and win then anyone thinking of giving it a go should.
The piece:
The biggest
challenges an incoming Labour Government will have to make will relate to the
economy and whether or not it will progress its principals to meet any
challenges it faces head on not just with a pragmatic approach, that will cause
internal division but also with an honesty that will carry public opinion with
it, when the problems it is more than likely to face will be bigger than the previous
incumbents.
In 2012 it is not possible to predict global economics but
solutions for the UK can be investigated.
There will be a real need for stimulator's for our economic
growth and while those stimulator's do not need to be generated from cuts, some
of the less favourable tax options will have to be viewed as a positive
development and recruitment tool, than a negative appeasement to accommodate
business and used, to make the UK a place for business to be.
There is real scope for the much maligned quantitative
easing to be used as a development investment tool, with loan repayments
including share options.
There will be a significant need to look at how we deliver
infrastructure with partial re-nationalisation becoming an investment option,
seen and explained in the same way oversees development is.
We can invest in housing stock, in mortgage and loan
provision to pay for it and in energy and transport and have the nation see the
same returns as major companies are doing.
We will need to look at social care and how it is paid for
and establish if an increase in national insurance can aid provision, even if
it requires social care to be brought into the NHS.
We will also have to grasp the nettle of benefit provision
and turn it into an enabler, with arguments on issues relating to exploitation
challenged and dismissed, with the system turned from the current paid for
nothing to a more productive scheme akin to workfare. The progressive aim being
that work skills, education or training levels be introduced, maintained or
developed for all those who are able to work.
Those enablers introduced and overseen correctly should
eventually see a reduction in the benefit bill.
The realities are a system can be developed that does not
exploit, which can elevate every concern Unions etc. have and we should be
willing to carry out the changes needed, even if the development process makes
it uncomfortable with its supporters and or TUC.
ALL Overseas aid will have to be scrutinised and explained,
with considerable thought given to process delivery, the availability of
surplus stock not monies and infrastructure requirement assessed along with the
beneficial goal to the UK given prior to any obligations being made.
There will also be a very real need to establish if
political motivations to revert to previous policies, or re establishing bodies
scrapped etc. can merit actual costs, for example the removal of PCC’s, or if
systems introduced, even if failing, can be maintained but better utilised
under our control.
While a Labour Government does not necessarily have to be
seen as something that makes the public sector grow beyond its payments
capabilities it should in no way be concerned in increasing its payments to the
sector as long as those payments are investments in its future that will
return profits.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
