British Politics’s Blog

The ravings of an individual, UK voter frustrated with our politicians

Posts Tagged ‘political opinion

British Public will not accept higher taxes

with 3 comments

David Cameron has made much about the fact that he cannot make any commitments in terms of tax cuts and he has also said that he cannot rule out tax increases. The reality is he probably thinks this makes him look tough, honest or maybe even sincere. But there is another harsh reality that he ignores at his peril. That is, the current Labour administration has constantly hammered the taxpayer to fund new initiatives, to invest in health, education and to deal with child poverty. We will no longer tolerate another attack on our finances, particularly given the current state of the economy and the failures of the current administration to get value for our taxes.

The Labour administration has used stealth taxes to increase the tax take, this is equivalent to 3% of GDP, or if you prefer, the equivalent of a further 10p in the pound on direct taxes. David Cameron’s government would benefit from this situation. Yes, I fully accept that as a result in the slow down in the economy and the high level of borrowings, that tax cuts may not be a short, or even medium term reality, but tax cuts must remain a long term commitment.

If we work hard, we are entitled to retain more of our hard earned money. The conservatives must, instead, look to address the public sector, which is so bloated, that it now employs one in 5 of our working population. They must look to ensure that we get more ‘bang for our buck’ the current Labour administration has spent £billions on consultants, spin, marketing and failed projects. Some estimates put their waste at over £100bn in 11 years. Any future government that does not accept that savings can be made in how taxpayers money is being spent, does not deserve the opportunity to lead this country.

The ‘something for nothing’ society needs to be addressed. There are 2.5m people claiming invalidity benefits, up by 1.5m during Labour’s reign, this must be addressed. Those with genuine needs must be supported, the rest must be forced to accept work. The taxpayer does not want to pay someone to sit at home on their backsides if they have a bad back, instead they can get an office job and make a contribution to society.

Any government, current, or future, would do well to consider the fact that the British public, or more specifically, the taxpayers, contributing to this society, are fed up with being made to pay more and more of our money in taxes. It is accepted, that it is far easier to introduce more stealth taxes or increase existing ones, than it is to deal with our bloated public service sector, our something for nothing society or our government waste, but deal with it is what they must do.

As a people, we have a moral responsibility to help those that are not able to help themselves, but we should not be encouraging people to simply help themselves to our tax money. Grand initiatives are okay, but only if we can afford them, we should for example, slash our overseas aid budget, which is currently costing the UK taxpayer some £5bn per annum. We should call a halt to the policy of cancelling third world debt without pre-conditions, which serves only to allow the rich elite of these countries to further prosper at our expense and the expense of their own people.

If Cameron, or anyone else for that matter wants my vote, they do not have to promise tax cuts, but they must promise not to increase taxes. Instead, they must get on with the job of reducing their overheads, getting rid of waste, exactly the same as every working family in the country is required to do in these difficult times.

Government must lead by example, and David Cameron should take note, that the last thing the taxpayers of this country needs is another government that is pilfering our money and then frittering it away. Arguably, taxes are a privilege, not a right.

Advertisements

Tories vow to address the health and safety culture

with 3 comments

Not before time, a UK political party has committed to address the almost farcical health & safety culture that has built up in the UK, not least its affect on the ability of the emergency services to do their jobs.

I remember discussing the case of Jordan Lyon who drowned last year with an ex-fireman. This young boy drowned even though two Community Safety Officers were on the scene, because these ‘officers’ did not have the appropriate training. The ex-fireman told me that the fire service is also tied up with Health & Safety red tape, to the extent, that if a fireman was to enter the water to save someones life, without the requisite support, then he could have faced losing his job and pension. I was appalled. If you take on the job of a police office or a fireman, you know that at times, you will have to risk your life to save others, very often, it is a judgement call, to have that decision made by health & safety officials is deplorable.

Imagine the situation if all our armed forces were forced to consider the health & safety risks before they went into battle. When you join the army, you know that you may be called upon to fight for your country and lay your life down in that service. You are entitled to expect senior officers to complete a risk assessment and not waste young lives, but not a health & safety officer! Yet here we are, with health & safety officers placing a raft of conditions on police officers and fireman. The public are entitled to expect the emergency services to help us when we are in need, they have chosen that vocation, are paid to do the job and they know the risks. They should not be prevented from doing their jobs through red tape.

Clearly this government does not understand the implications of all this, although that is not particularly surprising, given they are so out of touch with the people of this country. I normally have a lot of time for Home Office Minister Tony McNulty, but here is what he had to say about the conservative proposals. “The lives of police officers and Police Community Support Officers are as important as those of the people they serve, and this government will back the police service in the day to-day operational decisions they make in protecting the public against crime and terrorism. “And we will ensure that the criminal justice system is firmly weighted in favour of the victim, not the criminal.” Yes, but these officers know the risks and they are paid to do a job, they should be allowed to get on with it.

I would suggest he ask the rank and file members of our emergency services as to whether or not they are in favour of all of these health & safety rules, whether they see it as the government protecting them, or unnecessary interference, in as much as it prevents an officer from making a safety assessment on the spot. There are 167,000 police officers in this country, yet we feel less safe than we did 20 years ago, why is that, could it be something to do with the fact that in many cases, police officers are prevented to go into a dangerous situation, unless they have back up?

We are constantly told that the emergency services deserve good salaries and pension schemes, because of the risks they take to protect the public, yet more and more, they are required to take less risk. Our police officers and firemen should not be risk averse, they must be brave, they are charged with protecting the public and they must be allowed to do so. With this health & safety culture of ours, we will never know whether lives are lost because officers don’t have the backbone to go in, or if they are simply following health & safety rules. I would hope that these officers are not hiding behind these rules, I am sure they are not, but unless they also make it clear that they do not want these restrictions, what is the public to think?

On top of all this, I believe there needs to be a very clear definition of ‘reasonable force’, it is currently very vague. There is a need for the public to act in cases when their are no police officers around, or the police are not allowed to act for fear of losing their jobs. Where the public do act, they must be protected by law, they should not live in fear of prosecution. In my view, reasonable force is any act necessary to prevent the threat and the benefit of doubt should always be given to the member of public that has intervened where a police officer couldn’t or wouldn’t.

But the conservatives should also deal with health and safety regulations in the workplace, this has gone so far, that it is simply killing small business who must either employ and health & safety officer or use the services of a consultant. Yes there must be rules because the public and employees are entitled to be protected, but health and safety has now turned into a massive industry and it is costing every single one of us. There needs to be balance. Once again, I hope the conservatives will be bold in their policies, there is no point in meddling, Health & Safety Regulations need wholesale reform.

Bankers must accept their own responsibility

with 2 comments

It is difficult to argue with the suggestion put forward by Power to the People, suggesting as it does, that the bankers should be held to account for their poor decision making that has, for the most part, brought about the current crisis.

When the dust settles, governments around the world need to reflect on precisely how a situation arose, where taxpayers were required to bail out struggling banks and insurers. This should be wide ranging and lead to both regulation and prosecution.

Power to the People

There is much talk about government responsibility through the poor enforcement of existing regulation and the need for more regulation and legislation. However, the bottom line is that the whole ethos of the city is that it thrives on being a free market. So yes, by all means include further regulation to avoid a repeat of the current fiasco, but don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Instead, remind city execurtives, whether they are from the banking, insurance or any other sector, that they are trustees of the shareholders, they are expected to increase wealth, not take massive gambles, which expose the very assets they are supposed to protect and grow.

There is a very good argument for prosecuting those executives that were involved in the decision making process that brought about this calamity, no matter where they are based. Their assets should be frozen and if they are found guilty, they should be siezed, only then can we be sure that they will have learned their lesson.

 

Google Groups
UK Politics
Visit this group

Gordon Browns own words come back to haunt him

with 6 comments

Over at political website Power to the People there has been analysis of some of the statements made by Gordon Brown in Labour Party Conference speeches or, as Chancellor in his budget address. Oh how, in the current climate, these words are coming back to haunt him.

Specifically, Gordon Brown, promised there would be no return to “Boom and Bust” and that he would not permit “instability, speculation or negative equity” in the property market whilst he was in charge of the UK economy. That notwithstanding, he has of course, also claimed credit for our economic growth, which I guess he can, but of course, his flawed, naive strategy allowed this to be achieved “on tick”. Surely, even a basic understanding of economics would have made clear, even to a “prudent” chancellor, that this boom would have to end (“bust”) and then, when the dust had settled, we would all be expected to repay our debts.

Gordon Brown may be prime minister now, but he cannot simply wipe away his 10 years as chancellor, during which he presided over a consumer boom financed on credit as well as a massive spending spree by the government, much of which was poorly invested. Today the Daily Mail suggested that there should be an end to Labour Party in fighting, to allow Gordon Brown to get on with the job of getting the UK economy back on track. Now here’s the thing, if Gordon Brown is so deluded, so removed from the real world that he cannot see where his policies have added to and fueled the current economic situation we are facing, how on earth can we trust him to do what is right for this country now? Maybe the tabloids are concerned that they, almost without exception, were also the very people that lauded Gordon Brown as a prudent and wise chancellor?

 

Google Groups
UK Politics
Visit this group

Federal Reserve Bank step in to help insurance firm AIG

with 3 comments

The world must welcome the news that the Federal Reserve Bank has stepped in to offer AIG, the American insurance giant with a bridging loan of $85bn. Although many pundits urged the fed not to intervene, there were just as many that were in support of such a move. The reality is, the Fed had little choice, given the ramifications of a failure of AIG could not be measured, but would have undoubtedly been far more significant than the failure of Lehman Brothers.

“It’s not just the failure of one company,” said Julie Grandstaff, vice president and managing director of StanCorp Investment Advisers. “It’s the ripple effect of the disappearance of counterparties” that was spurring urgent efforts to bolster AIG.

AIG’s difficulties have been exacerbated by a fall in its share price of some 60% and a downgrade of its financial standing by three levels to A- by Standard & Poor, making it more difficult and expensive to raise funds. Too many downgrades could trigger events requiring AIG to post billions in collateral to its credit default swap counter-parties. These ‘swaps’ are essentially insurance coverage to protect investors against defaulting bonds or debt. These products, often linked to the US real estate market, are at the heart of the current banking crisis and have led to massive write-downs of assets around the world.

AIG’s problems actually started earlier in the year after their auditors, Price Waterhouse claimed that AIG had material weakness in its internal controls over financial reporting and oversight. This type of qualification for any business is quite serious, but for the business such as AIG, it was bound to lead to some fall out, indeed, its shares fell some 10% on a single day in February following this news.

With one trillion dollars in assets and tentacles in many markets the failure of AIG would have affected many, many more companies, given it is not just an insurer, but a major player in the Credit Default Swap market. In the end the Fed could not stand by and do nothing.

Once the financial markets settle down, there is a good case for looking at how such major companies became engaged in such a risky strategy and who benefited, in what appears to smack of short-termism. There may even be a case to answered by the directors of some of the companies that have been affected, either way, there is certainly a case for more regulation and given American tax payers are expected to take up the risk, it is only right that they should seek assurances in terms of the way these types of companies trade in the future.

Fuel Poverty – The case for creative thinking and solutions

with 5 comments

Within the UK, there is no denying that there are a high number of people in fuel poverty. These include ordinary families on low incomes, pensioners, lone parents, the unemployed and those with long term disabilities and registered as unable to work. In fact, the problem is so large, estimated to be some 4.5m, that the government cannot wave their wand and make the problem go away. That is the long and short of it.

Union leaders and Labour MP’s can huff and puff as much as they like, but the harsh reality is, this government has squandered much of the income it has gained as a consequence of the economic boom, higher taxes and borrowing. This means that the cupboard is bare. The union leaders crying foul, are the same people that fought and succeeded in getter higher wages for their members and in the process, supporting this government. The MP’s bleating, are the same ones that thought the gravy train of higher taxes, followed by waste, was okay. They have themselves, New Labour values and specifically, this government to blame. So there is no point trying to convince us that you are fighting for the ‘people’ when you are as guilty as the rest for the position we all find ourselves in.

It is time to stop the whining and start thinking creatively. It is time to forget trying to fleece the ordinary taxpayer that has spent the last 11 years supporting those that cannot or will not work and propping this government allowing them to claim that they have successfully invested in our services, whilst failing to demonstrate any real tangible benefit to the majority.

The Labour government typically throw money and/or resource at problems in the hope that it will fix the problem, or at least provide a brief respite, perhaps with some good headlines. Their spendthrift ways have lumbered this country with an enormous mountain of debt, which includes official borrowings of £450bn and another £170bn that needs to be paid between now and 2032 on PFI schemes. This ignores the £800bn or so shortfall in government pension schemes. In fact, it is an utter mess, and demonstrates what a tardy bunch this government is. Many of the foolish press barons have hailed Gordon Brown as a prudent or successful chancellor, history will judge him differently.

With nothing in the kitty, ‘working’ taxpayers are so highly taxed through direct, indirect and stealth taxes introduced by this government and with realborrowings at an all time high, there is little room to manoeuvre, even for a government adept at screwing every last penny from the rest of us. Now is the time for new ideas, a bold approach, creativity and above all honesty.

Windfall taxes are a ‘one off’ short term measure with long term consequences, given the energy companies will get the money back somewhere, either by reducing necessary investment, increasing energy cost for the majority, or, most likely a combination of the two. Similarly, throwing money at the problem, assuming we had any, in the guise of fuel credits is knee-jerk and would then be expected every year. The answer is investment in ways to reduce energy consumption through insulation, energy saving appliances and bulbs and other such measures. Estimates suggest that these measures could reduce our energy bills by up to 35%.

The government should encourage the energy companies to invest their carbon credits in the UK rather than elsewhere. They should be incentivised, rather than bullied into offering more support for the Warm Front programme and the government should put back the money they withdrew from the scheme. The energy companies should, however, be forced, by legislation if necessary, to offer the so called ‘social tariffs’ to all those in need and should be prevented from charging higher tariffs for meters on non-direct debit customers. The energy companies have dragged their feet on social tariffs and the penal rates they charge people who use pre-payment meters, this in unacceptable. The regulator should be given more powers to mandate and control issues such as access to social tariffs as well as price rises.

The government then needs to be more creative. Lets face it, at a time like this, everyone needs to pull together. Those in fuel poverty should be encouraged to help themselves, not simply come along to the government expecting more money, which the rest of us will have to pay. Ordinary working families, whether they fall inside or outside the fuel poverty trap are feeling the pinch. Many have had to reduce their expenditure on non-essentials in order that they can meet the higher fuel prices, higher costs in getting to and from work, higher food prices, higher mortgage costs and higher local taxes. They too are suffering, even though they are working, some, many have had to also take on a part-time job in order that they can meet their obligations and keep their head above water. What of these people, the taxpayers that make it possible to support so many that are not working or are retired, don’t they matter?

No solution is going to be perfect, but you can be damned certain, that chucking borrowed money that this country doesn’t have at the problem is going to be much worse. Here are some ideas the government could consider.

  1. Determine which of those in ‘fuel poverty’ are capable of helping themselves with government assistance or encouragement and which are not.
  2. Allow those on fixed incomes, such as lone parents, disability allowances and the unemployed to take on a part-time job (stacking shelves, land work, cleaning houses etc) and retain the income, free of tax, national insurance and, most importantly benefit deductions. The limit for this extra income should be set at a level equivalent to what the government believes is the additional cost of living as a consequence of food and energy increases.
  3. Allow those in ‘fuel poverty’ and in receipt of some form of ‘tax credit’ to earn an additional income through a part-time job, free of tax and national insurance, albeit up to a pre-determined limit, set by the government or better still, experts!
  4. Remove VAT and any other forms of duties on items that are routinely used to save energy, such as, energy saving bulbs, insulation, gas boilers and so on.
  5. Reduce the amount of paperwork pensioners have to complete in order that they can take on a part-time job. Provide them with an additional ‘work credit’ whereby they can earn up to a pre-determined amount, free of tax and national insurance contribution, without affecting their pensions. Increase the work credit by an amount equal to each allowance they do not claim, such as the ‘winter fuel payment’, the savings could be reinvested.
  6. Stop paying the winter fuel allowance to pensioners that no longer reside in the UK and reinvest this money into support for the most needy or energy saving measures.
  7. Provide, if necessary, secured short-term, interest free loans to private landlords, housing associations and local authorities to allow them to bring properties under their control up to acceptable standards in terms of energy efficiency. – A large proportion of homes that need upgrading are in the private sector.

The policy of assuming that there will always be enough taxpayers that can be fleeced to support those that are actually capable of helping themselves in times of need has to stop, it is not sustainable. Yes, if they cannot work, through a genuine disability, age, or lack of mobility then we should offer support, but if they can help themselves, why should they get away scotfree whilst the rest of us pick up the tab through higher taxes and having to take on extra jobs? It is time to view the so called priviledged not as a gravy train, but as the conduit through which those less fortunate can have a better existence.

The truth is, many of those that are capable of helping themselves, probably would if they are in dire straits. However, New Labour has exercised and grown this culture of state intervention, the government will always come to the aid of those less well off. Little or no effort is put into finding out whether they can or are willing to help themselves. If someone on benefit tries to get a part-time job to cover the additional energy costs, they can expect to lose the equivalent amount in state benefits. Why, where is the incentive? I am not suggesting that we should let people abuse the system, just that they are encouraged to help themselves, within limits that relate to their assessed additional needs.

Similarly pensioners are penalised if they work part-time. Clobbered with paperwork and additional taxes, encourage them, don’t penalise them. Government should look to incentivise, cajole and if necessary bully people into helping themselves, rather than transferring the burden onto overburdened taxpayers who are suffering just as badly.

Okay, I accept there are flaws and risks in some of my suggestions, but then I am not an economist or a civil servant. What I do possess is commonsense and a desire to be constructive in my criticism, the former is something the government lacks and the latter something the opposition parties lack. At least my suggestions are a start, perhaps those better qualified than myself can come up with working proposals that encourage those that need help to do more for themselves, thereby reducing the burden on existing taxpayers already facing pressure on their own finances.

 

Google Groups
UK Politics
Visit this group

OECD UK Recession Warning and the future for MPs

with 4 comments

The OECD have now confirmed what everyone else in the UK could ‘feel’, but our own government was keen to deny, that the UK is about to enter a recession. Darling and Brown simply had to know the truth and it is unforgivable that they could not be straight with the electorate, many of whom, entrusted New Labour with the future of our economy. That abuse of trust is shameful.

Instead of worrying about our economic situation, all Gordon Brown seems to be concerned with is his future as leader, instead of worrying about the people of this country, all New Labour seem to be concerned with is whether they can retain their seats. They are all spending so much time looking inward, for self-interest, that they are ignoring what is happening in the outside world, or more specifically, in the UK.

Contrary to Gordon Brown’s assertions, the UK’s fundamentals are not strong, in fact, it takes the highly respected OECD to tell us that the UK is in trouble. However, not only is the UK economy predicted to shrink in the next two quarters, but the UK is also the only economy not expected to see a recovery this year. The OECD said that Britain would fare worst amongst the Group of Seven leading economies. This is in spite of the assurances from Gordon Brown who has regularly claimed that the UK is the best performer among the G7, which includes Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States. The OECD expects the UK to grow by 1.4% in 2009, against the government forecasts of 2.5%. Okay this government has missed most of it’s previous growth targets, not something they brag about, but in the current climate, wishful thinking is not appropriate. There is also a prediction of some 200,000 people being added to the jobless total, which is already at a record high when you consdier that thatere are estimated to be some 2.5m on some form of long term disability.

The OECD have even given some of the reasons behind our weak position, most noteably that the Government’s policy of spend and borrow has left this country ill-equipped to deal with this economic slump. Interesting, that the average man in the street could see this wasn’t sustainable, but our elected officials could not, or perhaps, would not. The truth is Gordon Brown, as chancellor, borrowed in a boom, leaving us with the largest budget deficit of any industrial economy. Now we are all going to have to pay the price.

Aside from the fact that New Labour, as guardians of our economy, should have been able to predict much (not all) of what is happening and tightened their fiscal belts, what is most disappointing is the other parties. The opposition parties are keen to criticise, but if they want to show that they are fit for government, then they should tell us what they would do. It doesn’t matter if New Labour steal their ideas, it is the well-being of our country that matters and the electorate will know who came up with the answers and demonstrated true leadership skills when we needed them most.

David Cameron and the conservative party are running scared, they are shouting from the sidelines, rather than getting stuck in. In other words, they are basking in the failures of this government, they are gloating, but, above all they are failing to demonstrate that they could do any better. There is no time like the present, for Cameron and the conservative party to show their mettle, air their policies, demonstrate their competence for government and show leadership under pressure. If Cameron cannot see that this is his chance, then he does not deserve the highest office in this country. If he continues to say nothing of any value or substance, then we are entitled to believe that he doesn’t know what to do and therefore, he and his party would be no better.

New Labour in general and Gordon Brown in particular have lost all credibility in terms of economic confidence and they have long lost the integrity that is essential to govern long term. This is not helped by the fact that they have patently denied any personal, or policy culpability, electing to blame everything on other factors such as the credit crunch and oil prices. We know that it had as much to do with this governments policy of spend, tax, borrow and spend, leaving nothing in the kitty for a boom period. 

Cameron on the other hand is demonstrating a lack of courage, an absence of policies or ideas, poor judgement in a time of trouble and little depth or gravitas. Charm and fancy words simply do not wash at a time like this. Cameron and the conservative party are so worried about getting it wrong, they have been paralysed with fear. We expect far, far more from the conservative party, which in the past has invariably been the principal bastions for economic competence, but under the leadership of Cameron, they seem to lack bottle, confidence and spirit.

In fact, if we look around, never has this country been so poorly served by its members of parliament. Most of our MP’s are more interested in playing up to the cameras and preening their feathers with statements to, and interviews with, the press, the editors of which, in turn, attempt to set the policy agenda and influence public opinion. Never before have we all felt so removed from our politician’s, who don’t talk like us, act like or or think like us. Our whole electoral system needs a good shake up, no longer should we be represented by career politicians who have rarely held down a proper job, no longer should we be represented by union activists who, however they may try and convince you otherwise, have little in common with the public. We need a system where real people, those with life experiences, families, mortgages, business experience and integrity, can be elected to represent us. In other words, people that look like us, act like us and speak like us.

All too often, as our elected MP’s enter parliament, they immediately go native. Corrupted by power, position and prestige. They forget why they were put there and start to believe that they are ‘different’ from the rest of us. For the most part, our MP’s are just good salespeople, yet once they are put to the test, they appear superficial. What we need is depth, all parties, but particularly the conservatives, should be selecting their candidates based not on gender or race, but whether or not they can make a contribution to society, to government. Not based on whether or not they went to school with them, but based on life experience, how grounded they are and whether they are likely to be seduced by membership of this exclusive club called parliament.

The British people are no longer as politically naive as they were in the past. The Internet means that they can communicate more easily with like minded people, no matter where they reside in the UK. They are more vocal than they have been in the past and they have more information at their fingertips than they have had in past decades. By comparison, parliament is firmly rooted in the past, it is crusty, old fashioned and inward looking. Newly elected members should be looking to modernise parliament, not simply fall in line, they should be looking to use their time in office to pass more control back to the people, rather than entrenching their grand and priveledged positions, by gaining more and yet more state control. Most importantly of all, they should be listening to their trustees, the people that elected them. Placing the electorates’ interest’s first, before their own and before that of the party.

This recession is likely to be different to previous ones. Not because of the suddenness, not because of the depth, or the expected duration, not because our government has lied to us about our true economic position. But because, this time, there is a very real risk that the groundswell of public opinion will not only impact on the government, but also on the lacklustre opposition, and the weak ‘other’ parties. If people have time on their hands due to lack of employment, an easy method of communicating with like-minded people and a desire to see change, we could well see another, formidable political party formed, this time with real people, who have genuine feel for what needs to be done, the energy and the desire to be part of this change and above all, new ideas and a commitment to follow them though.

Political parties take note, members of parliament take note, the public have had enough of micromanagement, of state control, of tax and spend government, of mortgaging our future through uncontrolled borrowing, of manipulating the figures to make things look better than they actually are, of being treated like fools, of lies, of ever rising taxes and above all, of you! In this time of need, we still have an overseas aid budget of £5bn, yes, £5bn, when there is a very real prospect that some of our pensioners will have to choose between heating and eating to use that over used, but insightful term. Where are our priorities?

Opposition parties take note, you need to stop gloating while the people of this country are suffering, you need to stop looking so weak, when we need strength, you need to demonstrate the courage of your convictions, to show us what you would do to make things better. You need to show your true colours (if you haven’t already). Above all you need to lead by example, be confident and at the same time remain grounded and in touch with the people that matter.

Imagine what would happen if the people of this country decided to vote, not for the principle 3 parties, but independents? If we have nothing to lose, this could happen. Yes it would be chaos, but it could be a precursor to a new political force, one that included the voters, rather than career politicians, then the boot would be on the other foot. Just 650 people rule 65m people, this is by consent, not as an automatic right. Our colonial past demonstrates only too clearly what happens when so called leaders consistently let down the people, when they are removed, remote or aloof from the mood of the public and when our leaders start to think they are better than everyone else.

In the UK is will not be a military coup, it won’t be a work to rule, it will be through the ballot box. Once the public recognise that it is possible to make a stand, buy choosing not to elect anyone from the main three political parties, then there will have to be change. When we, your trustees, have little to lose, expect the unexpected. Members of Parliament, you have been warned!

 

Google Groups
UK Politics
Visit this group