I have just read this article, and I am stunned.
This is the headline;
Police refuse to name sex offenders on the run 'because of their RIGHT to privacy'
An extract;
Police are refusing to reveal the identities of sex offenders who are on the run - because it would be an invasion of their privacy.
An invasion of their privacy. For crying out loud, don't they think that they could be a danger to the public.
Four registered sex offenders have been on the run for as long as two years after disappearing from their homes in the North-East.
But confusion over whether the wanted criminals should be identified means that just one of them has been made known to the public, sparking fury among victim's groups.
Cleveland Police was the only force that agreed to issue the name and photograph of a man who has been missing since last year.
This is what might happen when they lose these sex offenders.
Police across the country came in for heavy criticism after Peter Chapman breached his order by leaving home in the North-West to go on the run.
Merseyside Police failed to issue a national alert to other forces until six months after he disappeared, while Durham, North Yorkshire and Cleveland Police missed a series of chances to catch him when he car was seen on CCTV in the region 16 times.
He was arrested on October 26, the day after he kidnapped, raped and killed Ashleigh Hall.
If someone is on the sex offenders register and the police lose them, then the police have a public duty to inform us.
Once again we see the criminals rights take precedent over the rights of the victims and the public.
Wednesday, 31 March 2010
Has Gordon Brown got the figures wrong again?
The following comes from http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/
Gordon Brown gave a speech on immigration today and 'Fact Check' checked it out.
An extract;
The claim
“Some people talk as if net inward migration is rising. In fact, it is falling – down from 237,000 in 2007, to 163,000 in 2008, to provisional figures of 147,000 last year.”
Gordon Brown, podcast on immigration, 26 March, 2010
The analysis
Brown said in a podcast today that net inward migration (the number of people coming to the UK minus the number of people leaving) had fallen. According to the PM, the figures fell from 237,000 in 2007 to 163,000 in 2008 to 147,000 last year.
But he was drawing his numbers from two different sets of statistics.
The first two figures are the confirmed long-term international migration figures for 2007 and 2008 (although incidentally, he appears to have slipped with the first number – the published National Statistics figure is actually 233,000). We don’t yet have a comparable figure for 2009.
So Brown instead took a figure from the International Passenger Survey (IPS). This is used to compile the long-term international migration figures – but it tends to be smaller because it excludes asylum seekers and people who overstay their original visas.
If the prime minister wanted to be accurate he should have compared the 2009 IPS figure to the 2007/8 IPS figures. They are 219,000 (year ended Dec 2007), 129,000 (year ended Dec 2008), 147,000 (year ended June 2009).
The sharp-eyed amongst you will see that there’s another reason to be cautious. The 2009 figure he quotes relates to the year up to June 2009. The 2007 and 2008 figures are for the year ending December.
Read the whole article and see what you think.
Doesn't Gordon Brown check what he is saying, or does he purposely manipulate the figures, or does he think the British public are stupid?
Gordon Brown gave a speech on immigration today and 'Fact Check' checked it out.
An extract;
The claim
“Some people talk as if net inward migration is rising. In fact, it is falling – down from 237,000 in 2007, to 163,000 in 2008, to provisional figures of 147,000 last year.”
Gordon Brown, podcast on immigration, 26 March, 2010
The analysis
Brown said in a podcast today that net inward migration (the number of people coming to the UK minus the number of people leaving) had fallen. According to the PM, the figures fell from 237,000 in 2007 to 163,000 in 2008 to 147,000 last year.
But he was drawing his numbers from two different sets of statistics.
The first two figures are the confirmed long-term international migration figures for 2007 and 2008 (although incidentally, he appears to have slipped with the first number – the published National Statistics figure is actually 233,000). We don’t yet have a comparable figure for 2009.
So Brown instead took a figure from the International Passenger Survey (IPS). This is used to compile the long-term international migration figures – but it tends to be smaller because it excludes asylum seekers and people who overstay their original visas.
If the prime minister wanted to be accurate he should have compared the 2009 IPS figure to the 2007/8 IPS figures. They are 219,000 (year ended Dec 2007), 129,000 (year ended Dec 2008), 147,000 (year ended June 2009).
The sharp-eyed amongst you will see that there’s another reason to be cautious. The 2009 figure he quotes relates to the year up to June 2009. The 2007 and 2008 figures are for the year ending December.
Read the whole article and see what you think.
Doesn't Gordon Brown check what he is saying, or does he purposely manipulate the figures, or does he think the British public are stupid?
An Early April Fools Joke, not 2
Going on from my previous blog An Early April Fools Joke, not.
Another blog by Anna Raccoon about waste in government.
The latest blog is called: - Newsflash: civil service stress update
Following on from an earlier excursion into yoga and other hobbies comes this harrowing tale of the utter waste endemic to government:
Worse though is the tale told by a friend. She had had a stressful couple of years as HR boss of a firm that was cutting half its staff and she decided when the time came for her to cut herself that she didn't need this any longer. She has a husband and family and wanted a routine sort of job without emotional strain, so she applied for and got one with the local authority, inputting data. It was boring and soothing and just what she needed but after a week she realised she was finishing the work given to her at lunchtime every day, so she asked the line manager – or possibly the Deputy Assistant Line Manager – for more. Shocked silence and sharp intake of breath.
You cannot be serious! That would count as undermining her colleagues or ‘rocking the boat’. She asked what she should do until five o’clock came and was told ‘Anything. Do your online Tesco shopping. Play Sudoku…just don`t ask for more work.’
There were seven full-time employees in that office and she says the work could have been done by a maximum of three and not busting a gut.
It’s not just that government spending can be cut. It must be cut.
This is just at one office in one local authority, so how much waste collectively is going on in the country as a whole, that's not including the waste the national government gets through. Should I mention the waste in the EU.
Government, local and national, should be put under the same scrutiny as a private business' accounts. The taxpayers should be getting value for money from the governments. If they ran a private business like they do our governments it would be bankrupt.
Another blog by Anna Raccoon about waste in government.
The latest blog is called: - Newsflash: civil service stress update
Following on from an earlier excursion into yoga and other hobbies comes this harrowing tale of the utter waste endemic to government:
Worse though is the tale told by a friend. She had had a stressful couple of years as HR boss of a firm that was cutting half its staff and she decided when the time came for her to cut herself that she didn't need this any longer. She has a husband and family and wanted a routine sort of job without emotional strain, so she applied for and got one with the local authority, inputting data. It was boring and soothing and just what she needed but after a week she realised she was finishing the work given to her at lunchtime every day, so she asked the line manager – or possibly the Deputy Assistant Line Manager – for more. Shocked silence and sharp intake of breath.
You cannot be serious! That would count as undermining her colleagues or ‘rocking the boat’. She asked what she should do until five o’clock came and was told ‘Anything. Do your online Tesco shopping. Play Sudoku…just don`t ask for more work.’
There were seven full-time employees in that office and she says the work could have been done by a maximum of three and not busting a gut.
It’s not just that government spending can be cut. It must be cut.
This is just at one office in one local authority, so how much waste collectively is going on in the country as a whole, that's not including the waste the national government gets through. Should I mention the waste in the EU.
Government, local and national, should be put under the same scrutiny as a private business' accounts. The taxpayers should be getting value for money from the governments. If they ran a private business like they do our governments it would be bankrupt.
The Judicial System is Insane
Read this headline from this article
Rapist avoids deportation so that he can marry in Britain
A convicted rapist facing deportation has won a High Court battle to be allowed to stay in the country to get married.
How in gods name can this be allowed to happen?
An extract
Alphonse Semo, a refugee from the Democratic Republic of Congo, threw his victim on a rubbish tip when he had finished with her.
But on Monday evening he won the right to remain for his wedding just hours before he was due to board a plane back to Africa.
A judge said it was difficult to have any sympathy for Semo, who was jailed for eight years, but he must be allowed to stay.
Why must he be allowed to stay?
Just because he wants to get married shouldn't be justification to let him stay in this country.
An extract;
The judge said the Home Secretary would have to reconsider later, after the marriage, whether to make a fresh attempt to deport him.
That would engage issues of EU law as his bride-to-be, Bunsana Kalonji, is a refugee from the Congo who became a German national.
The pair have a long-established relationship. Ms Kalonji is in the UK, exercising her right to work here under Community law.
Once married, the pair are expected to claim that Semo is legally entitled to remain in the UK as the spouse of an European Economic Area national entitled to free movement within EU member states, including the UK.
So once married he is legally entitled to remain in the UK and have free movement with in the EU.
Fine, just one question.
What about the rights of the woman who this scum raped.
What about the rights of the law abiding people of this country to feel safe.
Once again the criminal's rights take precedent over the victim's rights.
If this woman, really wants to marry this scum then take him to live in Germany, but I bet Germany will some how refuse him entry.
Once again we are being screwed by the EU regulations.
We used to have a justice system in this county, but due to so many new regulations and the in-human rights act it is turning into a joke.
Rapist avoids deportation so that he can marry in Britain
A convicted rapist facing deportation has won a High Court battle to be allowed to stay in the country to get married.
How in gods name can this be allowed to happen?
An extract
Alphonse Semo, a refugee from the Democratic Republic of Congo, threw his victim on a rubbish tip when he had finished with her.
But on Monday evening he won the right to remain for his wedding just hours before he was due to board a plane back to Africa.
A judge said it was difficult to have any sympathy for Semo, who was jailed for eight years, but he must be allowed to stay.
Why must he be allowed to stay?
Just because he wants to get married shouldn't be justification to let him stay in this country.
An extract;
The judge said the Home Secretary would have to reconsider later, after the marriage, whether to make a fresh attempt to deport him.
That would engage issues of EU law as his bride-to-be, Bunsana Kalonji, is a refugee from the Congo who became a German national.
The pair have a long-established relationship. Ms Kalonji is in the UK, exercising her right to work here under Community law.
Once married, the pair are expected to claim that Semo is legally entitled to remain in the UK as the spouse of an European Economic Area national entitled to free movement within EU member states, including the UK.
So once married he is legally entitled to remain in the UK and have free movement with in the EU.
Fine, just one question.
What about the rights of the woman who this scum raped.
What about the rights of the law abiding people of this country to feel safe.
Once again the criminal's rights take precedent over the victim's rights.
If this woman, really wants to marry this scum then take him to live in Germany, but I bet Germany will some how refuse him entry.
Once again we are being screwed by the EU regulations.
We used to have a justice system in this county, but due to so many new regulations and the in-human rights act it is turning into a joke.
Tuesday, 30 March 2010
How many mistakes like this have the MOD done.
Once again thanks to http://twitter.com/IanPJ for this find.
The following comes from the Hounslow Chronicle.
An extract;
The Ministry of Defence faces a bill for hundreds of millions of pounds if the RAF's new fleet of tanker and transport aircraft is to be able to fly in war zones such as Afghanistan, the Whitehall spending watchdog has warned.
In a highly critical report, the National Audit Office said that the £10.5 billion private finance initiative (PFI) deal to provide 14 new Airbus A330-200 aircraft was already running five-and-a-half years behind schedule.
It warned that there could now be years of further delays if the MoD decided they should be "retro-fitted" with flight deck armour and other protective equipment to enable them to operate in "high threat environments".
So the new aircraft was not originally ordered with the protective armour for the flight deck. Ok.
An extract
The NAO said that when the MoD originally began work on the tanker aircraft procurement programme, it was not envisaged that they could be required to fly directly into conflict zones and no funding was provided for protective equipment.
Instead it was decided that the additional equipment would have to be "retro-fitted" once the RAF starts taking delivery of the aircraft next year - a process which the NAO said could cost "several hundred million pounds" if it goes ahead.
It's a military aircraft for crying out loud, didn't they think it just might be used in a war zone?
Did any of the pencil pushers in the MOD actually ask someone from the military where these aircraft might have to fly?
So basically money that could of been spent on better equipment for our troops, like body armour, better armoured vehicles, or even just better boots is swallowed up by the incompetence of the pencil pushers in the MOD.
Like what Ian PJ says:- It is seriously time to get rid of every non military dickhead from the MoD. Political bureaucrats are killing it.
How many projects like this is happening at the MOD.
I presume they do ask the military what they would like, but are they over ruled by the money men and then the troops on the ground get sub standard equipment?
Going by what we have been hearing over the last few months and years, the troops have been getting substandard equipment.
This must change, we cannot send our troops to a war zone without proper equipment.
In my opinion if our troops are sent out with sub standard equipment and are injured, or worse killed, then someone must answer for it.
Our troops know that when they join the military they may go to war, and they know the sacrifice they may have to make, but the MOD should at least make sure that they have the equipment to keep them as safe as possible.
If directors of a company can be charged with corporate manslaughter if someone dies from using sub standard equipment, then why can't the pen pushers, and government ministers, at the MOD be up on similar charges.
You cannot send troops to a war zone without proper equipment.
The following comes from the Hounslow Chronicle.
An extract;
The Ministry of Defence faces a bill for hundreds of millions of pounds if the RAF's new fleet of tanker and transport aircraft is to be able to fly in war zones such as Afghanistan, the Whitehall spending watchdog has warned.
In a highly critical report, the National Audit Office said that the £10.5 billion private finance initiative (PFI) deal to provide 14 new Airbus A330-200 aircraft was already running five-and-a-half years behind schedule.
It warned that there could now be years of further delays if the MoD decided they should be "retro-fitted" with flight deck armour and other protective equipment to enable them to operate in "high threat environments".
So the new aircraft was not originally ordered with the protective armour for the flight deck. Ok.
An extract
The NAO said that when the MoD originally began work on the tanker aircraft procurement programme, it was not envisaged that they could be required to fly directly into conflict zones and no funding was provided for protective equipment.
Instead it was decided that the additional equipment would have to be "retro-fitted" once the RAF starts taking delivery of the aircraft next year - a process which the NAO said could cost "several hundred million pounds" if it goes ahead.
It's a military aircraft for crying out loud, didn't they think it just might be used in a war zone?
Did any of the pencil pushers in the MOD actually ask someone from the military where these aircraft might have to fly?
So basically money that could of been spent on better equipment for our troops, like body armour, better armoured vehicles, or even just better boots is swallowed up by the incompetence of the pencil pushers in the MOD.
Like what Ian PJ says:- It is seriously time to get rid of every non military dickhead from the MoD. Political bureaucrats are killing it.
How many projects like this is happening at the MOD.
I presume they do ask the military what they would like, but are they over ruled by the money men and then the troops on the ground get sub standard equipment?
Going by what we have been hearing over the last few months and years, the troops have been getting substandard equipment.
This must change, we cannot send our troops to a war zone without proper equipment.
In my opinion if our troops are sent out with sub standard equipment and are injured, or worse killed, then someone must answer for it.
Our troops know that when they join the military they may go to war, and they know the sacrifice they may have to make, but the MOD should at least make sure that they have the equipment to keep them as safe as possible.
If directors of a company can be charged with corporate manslaughter if someone dies from using sub standard equipment, then why can't the pen pushers, and government ministers, at the MOD be up on similar charges.
You cannot send troops to a war zone without proper equipment.
Sunday, 28 March 2010
The Royal Navy
Has anyone wondered how many of our Royal Naval ships have been decommissioned over the last 13 years?
Well I came across this and was shocked at what i found.
I found this from http://twitter.com/IanPJ
The following is from They work for you
The Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels, including submarines, withdrawn from service in each year since 1997 are shown in the following table:
Royal Navy vessels withdrawn from service & Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels withdrawn from service
1997
HMS Battleaxe
RFA Resource
HMS Orwell
HMS Peacock
HMS Plover
HMS Starling
HMS Orkney
HMY Britannia
1998
HMS Blackwater
HMS Spey
HMS Arun
HMS Itchen
1999
HMS Birmingham
HMS Boxer
HMS Beaver
HMS London
2000
HMS Brave
RFA Olna
HMS Bicester
RFA Olwen
2001
HMS Intrepid
HMS Coventry
HMS Berkeley
HMS Cromer
HMS Herald
HMS Bulldog
2002
HMS Fearless
HMS Sheffield
HMS Alderney
HMS Beagle
2003
HMS Splendid
HMS Anglesey
HMS Shetland
HMS Guernsey
HMS Lindisfarne
2004
HMS Bridport
RFA Sir Geraint
2005
HMS Glasgow
RFA Sir Percivale
HMS Newcastle
HMS Cardiff
HMS Norfolk
HMS Marlborough
HMS Sandown
HMS Inverness
HMS Brecon
HMS Cottesmore
HMS Dulverton
HMS Leeds Castle
2006
HMS Spartan
RFA Sir Galahad
HMS Sovereign
RFA Sir Tristram
HMS Grafton
RFA Grey Rover
2007
HMS Dumbarton Castle
RFA Brambleleaf
RFA Oakleaf
2008
HMS Superb
RFA Sir Bedivere
2009
HMS Trafalgar
HMS Southampton
HMS Exeter
HMS Nottingham is due to be withdrawn from service during February 2010.
The following is the ships that have been ordered to replace the above.
Construction contracts for 15 surface ships and submarines have been signed since May 1997. Details are provided in the following table:
Type of vessel Name of vessel
2000
Landing Ship Dock (Auxiliary) Largs Bay
Lyme Bay
2000
Echo Class Survey Vessels Echo Enterprise
2000
(1) Type 45 Destroyer Daring
Dauntless
Diamond
Dragon
Defender
Duncan
2001
Landing Ship Dock (Auxiliary) Mounts Bay
Cardigan Bay
2007
Astute Class Submarine Audacious
2008
Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers Queen Elizabeth
Prince Of Wales
(1 )The Type 45 contract was re-negotiated in 2007.
Defense spending went up in most years, I don't think so.
It is more like defense savings from decommissioning so many Royal Navy Ships
Britannia rules the waves, not any more we don't.
Well I came across this and was shocked at what i found.
I found this from http://twitter.com/IanPJ
The following is from They work for you
The Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels, including submarines, withdrawn from service in each year since 1997 are shown in the following table:
Royal Navy vessels withdrawn from service & Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels withdrawn from service
1997
HMS Battleaxe
RFA Resource
HMS Orwell
HMS Peacock
HMS Plover
HMS Starling
HMS Orkney
HMY Britannia
1998
HMS Blackwater
HMS Spey
HMS Arun
HMS Itchen
1999
HMS Birmingham
HMS Boxer
HMS Beaver
HMS London
2000
HMS Brave
RFA Olna
HMS Bicester
RFA Olwen
2001
HMS Intrepid
HMS Coventry
HMS Berkeley
HMS Cromer
HMS Herald
HMS Bulldog
2002
HMS Fearless
HMS Sheffield
HMS Alderney
HMS Beagle
2003
HMS Splendid
HMS Anglesey
HMS Shetland
HMS Guernsey
HMS Lindisfarne
2004
HMS Bridport
RFA Sir Geraint
2005
HMS Glasgow
RFA Sir Percivale
HMS Newcastle
HMS Cardiff
HMS Norfolk
HMS Marlborough
HMS Sandown
HMS Inverness
HMS Brecon
HMS Cottesmore
HMS Dulverton
HMS Leeds Castle
2006
HMS Spartan
RFA Sir Galahad
HMS Sovereign
RFA Sir Tristram
HMS Grafton
RFA Grey Rover
2007
HMS Dumbarton Castle
RFA Brambleleaf
RFA Oakleaf
2008
HMS Superb
RFA Sir Bedivere
2009
HMS Trafalgar
HMS Southampton
HMS Exeter
HMS Nottingham is due to be withdrawn from service during February 2010.
The following is the ships that have been ordered to replace the above.
Construction contracts for 15 surface ships and submarines have been signed since May 1997. Details are provided in the following table:
Type of vessel Name of vessel
2000
Landing Ship Dock (Auxiliary) Largs Bay
Lyme Bay
2000
Echo Class Survey Vessels Echo Enterprise
2000
(1) Type 45 Destroyer Daring
Dauntless
Diamond
Dragon
Defender
Duncan
2001
Landing Ship Dock (Auxiliary) Mounts Bay
Cardigan Bay
2007
Astute Class Submarine Audacious
2008
Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers Queen Elizabeth
Prince Of Wales
(1 )The Type 45 contract was re-negotiated in 2007.
Defense spending went up in most years, I don't think so.
It is more like defense savings from decommissioning so many Royal Navy Ships
Britannia rules the waves, not any more we don't.
Saturday, 27 March 2010
Some Statistics on Unemployment
The following is taken from uk news network
10 things you didn't know about the unemployment statistics
Every month the Office for National Statistics publishes the UK's unemployment figures. But the report doesn't just give the big numbers. It includes a fascinating breakdown of the UK at work - and out of it.
Here are 10 things we learnt today (and the table numbers in the official release, so you can find them too):
The following statistics is taken from here
Labour market statistics
March 2010
Date: 17 March 2010
Coverage: United Kingdom Theme: Labour Market
For November 2009 to January 2010:
The employment rate was 72.2 per cent and there were 28.86 million employed people.
The unemployment rate was 7.8 per cent and there were 2.45 million unemployed people.
The inactivity rate was 21.5 per cent and there were 8.16 million working age inactive people.
Total pay (including bonuses) rose by 0.9 per cent on a year earlier.
Regular pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 1.4 per cent on a year earlier.
The Following is taken from this article
1. There are fewer people employed than at any time in the last 12 years
The employment rate in the three months to January 2010 is 72.2% - it fell by 54,000 on the quarter to reach 28.86m.
2. There are over 8m 'economically inactive' people in the UK
8,157,000 people between 16 and retirement age to be exact - of whom 71% do not want a job. The biggest group are the 2.3m people looking after their families - up by 32,000 on the year. Next come students (2.3m) and the long-term sick (2m). 74,000 are 'discouraged' - up by 21,000 on the year.
3. If you work in the private sector, wages are going down … in the public sector, they're going up
Average weekly earnings in the private sector are £426 per week - down 0.7% on January 2009. In the public sector, they're higher - £461 per week, up 4.1% on Jan 2009.
4. Public sector jobs are still going up
6m people are employed in the public sector - +46,000 on the year. 21.1% of us work in the public sector. The biggest percentage increase has been in the NHS - up by 4% on the year to 1.6m people in January. In contrast, private sector employment is down by 527,000.
5. The highest wages are in construction - the lowest in hotels and restaurants
Construction workers get an average of £564 per week - compared to £303 for those who work in restaurants and hotels.
6. There are more workers from the USA; less from Europe
Employed workers from the EU14 countries - the rich European countries - are down by 26,000 on the year (-3.8%). Those from the new accession countries, such as Poland, have been hit less: down 3,000, or -0.7%. The biggest group going up are those from the USA - +25.6% (21,000 people), although India (+14,000) and Australia/New Zealand (+11%) have seen rises too.
7. There are more long-term unemployed
Those unemployed over six months has gone up by 58.7% to 549,000 people.
8. More of us are part-time
Part-time jobs are up - by 1.3% or 87,000 on the year. Meanwhile full-time employment has gone down by 3.4% (-642,000).
9. There are less young people employed
Employment is down for 16-17 year-olds (by 22.2% or 109,000) and 18-24 year-olds (down 6.6% or 237,000)
10. Southampton has the best unemployment figures this month
If you count reducing benefit claimant figures, that is. Constituencies in Southampton and Hampshire have seen the biggest drops ion claimant figures in the UK. In Southampton Test, the are 7.8% less claimants, in Southampton Itchen there are 6.7% less. Similar falls have taken place in Eastleigh and New Forest East. From our analysis
10 things you didn't know about the unemployment statistics
Every month the Office for National Statistics publishes the UK's unemployment figures. But the report doesn't just give the big numbers. It includes a fascinating breakdown of the UK at work - and out of it.
Here are 10 things we learnt today (and the table numbers in the official release, so you can find them too):
The following statistics is taken from here
Labour market statistics
March 2010
Date: 17 March 2010
Coverage: United Kingdom Theme: Labour Market
For November 2009 to January 2010:
The employment rate was 72.2 per cent and there were 28.86 million employed people.
The unemployment rate was 7.8 per cent and there were 2.45 million unemployed people.
The inactivity rate was 21.5 per cent and there were 8.16 million working age inactive people.
Total pay (including bonuses) rose by 0.9 per cent on a year earlier.
Regular pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 1.4 per cent on a year earlier.
The Following is taken from this article
1. There are fewer people employed than at any time in the last 12 years
The employment rate in the three months to January 2010 is 72.2% - it fell by 54,000 on the quarter to reach 28.86m.
2. There are over 8m 'economically inactive' people in the UK
8,157,000 people between 16 and retirement age to be exact - of whom 71% do not want a job. The biggest group are the 2.3m people looking after their families - up by 32,000 on the year. Next come students (2.3m) and the long-term sick (2m). 74,000 are 'discouraged' - up by 21,000 on the year.
3. If you work in the private sector, wages are going down … in the public sector, they're going up
Average weekly earnings in the private sector are £426 per week - down 0.7% on January 2009. In the public sector, they're higher - £461 per week, up 4.1% on Jan 2009.
4. Public sector jobs are still going up
6m people are employed in the public sector - +46,000 on the year. 21.1% of us work in the public sector. The biggest percentage increase has been in the NHS - up by 4% on the year to 1.6m people in January. In contrast, private sector employment is down by 527,000.
5. The highest wages are in construction - the lowest in hotels and restaurants
Construction workers get an average of £564 per week - compared to £303 for those who work in restaurants and hotels.
6. There are more workers from the USA; less from Europe
Employed workers from the EU14 countries - the rich European countries - are down by 26,000 on the year (-3.8%). Those from the new accession countries, such as Poland, have been hit less: down 3,000, or -0.7%. The biggest group going up are those from the USA - +25.6% (21,000 people), although India (+14,000) and Australia/New Zealand (+11%) have seen rises too.
7. There are more long-term unemployed
Those unemployed over six months has gone up by 58.7% to 549,000 people.
8. More of us are part-time
Part-time jobs are up - by 1.3% or 87,000 on the year. Meanwhile full-time employment has gone down by 3.4% (-642,000).
9. There are less young people employed
Employment is down for 16-17 year-olds (by 22.2% or 109,000) and 18-24 year-olds (down 6.6% or 237,000)
10. Southampton has the best unemployment figures this month
If you count reducing benefit claimant figures, that is. Constituencies in Southampton and Hampshire have seen the biggest drops ion claimant figures in the UK. In Southampton Test, the are 7.8% less claimants, in Southampton Itchen there are 6.7% less. Similar falls have taken place in Eastleigh and New Forest East. From our analysis
Just some bed time reading for you all
Labour's Pledges
Secure the recovery
By putting over £23,000 on every person in this country.
By taxing the very people who you have taxed to death already.
Taxing the very people who run the big businesses out of the country.
Raising family living standards
Raising standards where being an unemployed single mother with up to 8 children, with an unemployed father of the latest child, is better off than a married couple with 2 children where both parents work but still get less money than the single mother.
Raising living standards for unemployed people with children to rent £1,000,000, yes £1 million, houses at the taxpayers expense.
Building a high tech economy
Businesses are building a high tech economy, it will work as long as Gordon Brown doesn't interfere with it.
A green investment bank, one question will they be using paper notes because if they do they will be contributing to deforestation.
Putting tax payers money into wind farms that don't work, they only make about a third of the power they claim.
Protecting front line services
Is that making sure the police are kept in doing more paperwork.
One Nurse looking after a ward full of patients, while the hospital managers drown them in paperwork and tell the nurses off for not completing the paperwork.
Letting Social workers take on a large work load that lets children that need protecting slip through the cracks.
Strengthen fairness in communities
Fairness in the communities that lets gangs of children beat up and kill the law abiding people.
Jail the law abiding citizens who protect their family and home from the criminals who break in.
Lets gangs kill each other by the knife and the gun.
Lets burglars off with community service to burgle again and again.
Making the elderly scared to step out of their own home.
Where gangs of children terrorise a man to have a heart attack.
Where 2 young children attack 2 other children and beat them and torture them and sexually abuse them until they are barely alive.
The picture below comes from the RED RAG Blog, it is more truthful than what Labour have pledged.
By putting over £23,000 on every person in this country.
By taxing the very people who you have taxed to death already.
Taxing the very people who run the big businesses out of the country.
Raising family living standards
Raising standards where being an unemployed single mother with up to 8 children, with an unemployed father of the latest child, is better off than a married couple with 2 children where both parents work but still get less money than the single mother.
Raising living standards for unemployed people with children to rent £1,000,000, yes £1 million, houses at the taxpayers expense.
Building a high tech economy
Businesses are building a high tech economy, it will work as long as Gordon Brown doesn't interfere with it.
A green investment bank, one question will they be using paper notes because if they do they will be contributing to deforestation.
Putting tax payers money into wind farms that don't work, they only make about a third of the power they claim.
Protecting front line services
Is that making sure the police are kept in doing more paperwork.
One Nurse looking after a ward full of patients, while the hospital managers drown them in paperwork and tell the nurses off for not completing the paperwork.
Letting Social workers take on a large work load that lets children that need protecting slip through the cracks.
Strengthen fairness in communities
Fairness in the communities that lets gangs of children beat up and kill the law abiding people.
Jail the law abiding citizens who protect their family and home from the criminals who break in.
Lets gangs kill each other by the knife and the gun.
Lets burglars off with community service to burgle again and again.
Making the elderly scared to step out of their own home.
Where gangs of children terrorise a man to have a heart attack.
Where 2 young children attack 2 other children and beat them and torture them and sexually abuse them until they are barely alive.
The picture below comes from the RED RAG Blog, it is more truthful than what Labour have pledged.
Labour's New Pledges
Fine, but can you at least finish the pledges you have made over the last 13 years.
Education, education, education
Tough on crime, tough of the causes of crime
NHS safe in our hands.
You haven't finished them off yet.
Education, education, education
Tough on crime, tough of the causes of crime
NHS safe in our hands.
You haven't finished them off yet.
Friday, 26 March 2010
Green Taxes
When global warming, caused by CO2, is found to be a bunch of lies, will we be given all our money back that has been taken in so called Green Taxes?
Also will the increases in fuel duty that has been down to CO2 emissions be reduced?
What about the increase in fuel tax on the flights, will they be reduced?
I doubt it because the government only used the climate debate to increase the amount of money they take of the hard working people of this country.
Also will the increases in fuel duty that has been down to CO2 emissions be reduced?
What about the increase in fuel tax on the flights, will they be reduced?
I doubt it because the government only used the climate debate to increase the amount of money they take of the hard working people of this country.
An Early April Fools Joke, not
I have just read this blog from Anna Raccoons blog
I thought it was an April Fools joke at first, but it isn't.
Read the blog below;
I certainly had to indulge in some heavy breathing after reading this farrago of nonsense:
'Civil servants have been given counselling manuals advising them how to deal with stress-related boredom and a lack of work.'
Just savour that for a moment. Contemplate your busy day, the demands on your time, the endless worries about how you will make ends meet this month and then consider that even more of your tax is being spent on teaching people who don’t have enough work to justify their “jobs” how to be calm about the fact that they’re wasting their lives and stealing your money.
'In one booklet from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, officials said stress-related problems could be caused by having “too little work or responsibility” and suggested that pressured workers take up a hobby to alleviate anxiety.
The Department for International Development’s book warned workers to avoid becoming lethargic from “too little pressure” but allow for 20 per cent more time to complete tasks they feel could add to stress.
“Breathe in and out heavily a few times and imagine yourself being successful,” it advises workers.'
I’ve breathed in and out heavily a few times, I can tell you.
I think the yogis who came up with this inspiration have been spending a little too much time “on the mat”.
What the hell is going on with this government?
I thought it was an April Fools joke at first, but it isn't.
Read the blog below;
I certainly had to indulge in some heavy breathing after reading this farrago of nonsense:
'Civil servants have been given counselling manuals advising them how to deal with stress-related boredom and a lack of work.'
Just savour that for a moment. Contemplate your busy day, the demands on your time, the endless worries about how you will make ends meet this month and then consider that even more of your tax is being spent on teaching people who don’t have enough work to justify their “jobs” how to be calm about the fact that they’re wasting their lives and stealing your money.
'In one booklet from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, officials said stress-related problems could be caused by having “too little work or responsibility” and suggested that pressured workers take up a hobby to alleviate anxiety.
The Department for International Development’s book warned workers to avoid becoming lethargic from “too little pressure” but allow for 20 per cent more time to complete tasks they feel could add to stress.
“Breathe in and out heavily a few times and imagine yourself being successful,” it advises workers.'
I’ve breathed in and out heavily a few times, I can tell you.
I think the yogis who came up with this inspiration have been spending a little too much time “on the mat”.
What the hell is going on with this government?
When did the UK become the Soviet Union?
Budget 2010: HMRC officers to get powers to open people's post without asking permission
Tax inspectors are to get wide-ranging powers to open people’s post without their permission for the first time, it can disclosed.
That is the headline to this article.
An Extract;
Officers will be allowed to intercept any suspicious mail anywhere in the country and open it before it is delivered, under plans being drawn up by the Government to amend the Postal Services Act.
The measure is billed as a bid to crack down on tobacco smuggling. However, a HM Revenue and Customs spokesman said the powers could be applied much more widely
I don't think tobacco smugglers will post their smuggled goods that much because it will cost too much and it will take weeks to get to the address.
The customs have said 'the powers could be applied much more widely.' I ask how wide will the powers go?
An Extract;
Civil liberties campaigners were appalled about the increased powers. Alex Deane, a spokesman for Big Brother Watch, said: “This is a dreadful development. The post has always been regarded as near-sacrosanct in law.
“The last time our mail was opened by the authorities without notice, our country was fighting a World War. I hardly think that the situation produced by the government’s tobacco tax compares.
“Once the principle of opening our mail has been accepted, what else will the Government use as an excuse to pry into our post?”
HM Revenue and Customs are growing increasingly aggressive in their battle with tax evaders. Earlier this year it announced plans for a crack down on middle class professionals who do not pay their fair share of tax.
The old Soviet Union was a government controlled state where mail was opened to check on the population.
Do you see any similarities with what the Soviet Union did and what this government is doing?
We are losing our freedom.
How many of our countrymen died in WW1 and WW2 for our freedom, only for the freedom they fought for to be taken away by this government and the EU.
The government is listening on our phone calls and emails, they are now going to be checking on our mail, the council can enter our homes with out a warrant or police presence.
What other freedoms are we going to lose in the future?
Tax inspectors are to get wide-ranging powers to open people’s post without their permission for the first time, it can disclosed.
That is the headline to this article.
An Extract;
Officers will be allowed to intercept any suspicious mail anywhere in the country and open it before it is delivered, under plans being drawn up by the Government to amend the Postal Services Act.
The measure is billed as a bid to crack down on tobacco smuggling. However, a HM Revenue and Customs spokesman said the powers could be applied much more widely
I don't think tobacco smugglers will post their smuggled goods that much because it will cost too much and it will take weeks to get to the address.
The customs have said 'the powers could be applied much more widely.' I ask how wide will the powers go?
An Extract;
Civil liberties campaigners were appalled about the increased powers. Alex Deane, a spokesman for Big Brother Watch, said: “This is a dreadful development. The post has always been regarded as near-sacrosanct in law.
“The last time our mail was opened by the authorities without notice, our country was fighting a World War. I hardly think that the situation produced by the government’s tobacco tax compares.
“Once the principle of opening our mail has been accepted, what else will the Government use as an excuse to pry into our post?”
HM Revenue and Customs are growing increasingly aggressive in their battle with tax evaders. Earlier this year it announced plans for a crack down on middle class professionals who do not pay their fair share of tax.
The old Soviet Union was a government controlled state where mail was opened to check on the population.
Do you see any similarities with what the Soviet Union did and what this government is doing?
We are losing our freedom.
How many of our countrymen died in WW1 and WW2 for our freedom, only for the freedom they fought for to be taken away by this government and the EU.
The government is listening on our phone calls and emails, they are now going to be checking on our mail, the council can enter our homes with out a warrant or police presence.
What other freedoms are we going to lose in the future?
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Corrugated corrigenda
Of all the stupid things I have heard, this is up there with the best of them.
This is from Anna Raccoon's Blog
'Britain has International agreements which govern the size and thickness of the corrugated sheets we are allowed to donate. Anything else would apparently cause confusion as you attempt to shelter from the rain and the winds under a collection of sheets that were not altogether uniform in size with those arriving from, say France, or the USA. You might not care about such things, but the civil servants in charge of these matters do.'
You can read the whole blog here.
This is from Anna Raccoon's Blog
'Britain has International agreements which govern the size and thickness of the corrugated sheets we are allowed to donate. Anything else would apparently cause confusion as you attempt to shelter from the rain and the winds under a collection of sheets that were not altogether uniform in size with those arriving from, say France, or the USA. You might not care about such things, but the civil servants in charge of these matters do.'
You can read the whole blog here.
Monday, 22 March 2010
The Post Office
Just a quick one.
It's 2:08PM and my post has just arrived.
I thought postal workers start at like 4 or 5 AM?
There must be a lot of mail to sort that wasn't delivered on the weekend.
It's 2:08PM and my post has just arrived.
I thought postal workers start at like 4 or 5 AM?
There must be a lot of mail to sort that wasn't delivered on the weekend.
Sunday, 21 March 2010
Maesdu Bridge
Yes this again.
I have been thinking about how to get the bridge built on time.
Have a look at this and see if you think it's better than what we have going on at the moment.
Yes I propose to call Santander and get Lewis Hamilton down and ask him to build Maesdu Bridge like he did in the advert.
If we all pitch in we could get it done in about a day.
The best thing about it is any 5 year old upwards can help build it.
I think at the rate they are building the bridge at the moment the 5 year olds will do a better job.
I have been thinking about how to get the bridge built on time.
Have a look at this and see if you think it's better than what we have going on at the moment.
Yes I propose to call Santander and get Lewis Hamilton down and ask him to build Maesdu Bridge like he did in the advert.
If we all pitch in we could get it done in about a day.
The best thing about it is any 5 year old upwards can help build it.
I think at the rate they are building the bridge at the moment the 5 year olds will do a better job.
A Quote from a BA Flight Attendant on Strike
This is the headline to this article;
'Most British Airways crew are striking on behalf of the passengers'
As cabin staff take to the picket lines, flights have been grounded and customers left with their travel plans in tatters
I bet all the passengers that have had their holidays ruined are very grateful for this.
An extract;
It was supposed to be a trip of a lifetime for the teenage musicians. After 18 months of fundraising, the flights to New York were booked, ready for their appearance in New York's Carnegie Hall, one of the world's most famous concert venues, a privilege that would see them join the ranks of performers such as Luciano Pavarotti, the Beatles and Judy Garland.
Another extract
Eating a "solidarity samosa" donated by a local shop, one flight attendant on the picket line at Hatton Cross tube station said she was striking because staffing cuts had lowered service standards, including in-flight food. "It is embarrassing now. We just cringe. Most crew, bizarrely enough, are striking on behalf of passengers."
Yes I choose an airline due to how fancy the food is, not.
British Airways flies the flag for the UK, and so does Virgin Airlines, but BA is struggling financially and needs to modernise. That means there have to be cuts in certain areas, but Unite doesn't get it.
If BA doesn't find a way to cut it's finances the company will fold and that will be damaging for all the employees at BA and for the UK as well.
In my opinion the Unite union has become a dinosaur from the past, they have Charlie Whelan at the heart of government telling Gordon Brown what to do, and he can't do much about it because Unite is one of the paymasters of Labour, and if the stories are true we, the taxpayers, have been funding the Labour party through the unions as well, see here and here.
I agree that we need unions to protect workers rights, to stop workers being treated like slaves, but unions have to face reality, there is a recession on and purse strings have to be tightened.
The Red Rag has a good blog entry that has an interesting point of view on this subject.
Update:
Check this site;
http://cash-gordon.com/
'Most British Airways crew are striking on behalf of the passengers'
As cabin staff take to the picket lines, flights have been grounded and customers left with their travel plans in tatters
I bet all the passengers that have had their holidays ruined are very grateful for this.
An extract;
It was supposed to be a trip of a lifetime for the teenage musicians. After 18 months of fundraising, the flights to New York were booked, ready for their appearance in New York's Carnegie Hall, one of the world's most famous concert venues, a privilege that would see them join the ranks of performers such as Luciano Pavarotti, the Beatles and Judy Garland.
Another extract
Eating a "solidarity samosa" donated by a local shop, one flight attendant on the picket line at Hatton Cross tube station said she was striking because staffing cuts had lowered service standards, including in-flight food. "It is embarrassing now. We just cringe. Most crew, bizarrely enough, are striking on behalf of passengers."
Yes I choose an airline due to how fancy the food is, not.
British Airways flies the flag for the UK, and so does Virgin Airlines, but BA is struggling financially and needs to modernise. That means there have to be cuts in certain areas, but Unite doesn't get it.
If BA doesn't find a way to cut it's finances the company will fold and that will be damaging for all the employees at BA and for the UK as well.
In my opinion the Unite union has become a dinosaur from the past, they have Charlie Whelan at the heart of government telling Gordon Brown what to do, and he can't do much about it because Unite is one of the paymasters of Labour, and if the stories are true we, the taxpayers, have been funding the Labour party through the unions as well, see here and here.
I agree that we need unions to protect workers rights, to stop workers being treated like slaves, but unions have to face reality, there is a recession on and purse strings have to be tightened.
The Red Rag has a good blog entry that has an interesting point of view on this subject.
Update:
Check this site;
http://cash-gordon.com/
Saturday, 20 March 2010
Gordon Brown's Wedding Vows
I found this on Charlotte Gore's Blog
This may or may not be true, you decide.
Of little interest to political historians and so largely not a matter of public record, the vows Gordon Brown made to Sarah Macaulay in 2000 at a surprise (and secret) ceremony in North Queensbury are published here for the first time
Sarah,
I make to you now a firm commitment and, in a real sense, a binding one. I commit to ensuring love remains at least at the 2000 level for the next 2 years, with an expectation that love will grow by 3.14% by the year 2003 – an end to boom and bust of love of your ex-boyfriend’s years.
In addition, I will ensure that where possible I will agree to honour you, in so far as it is prudent to do so.
I am also pleased to announce that before our first anniversary, I will, in line with estimates both have and hold you, irrespective of your medical needs or financial situation.
This is the firm, near rock solid commitment I make to you. Contrast that with the so-called promises of your ex-boyfriend: He promised you flowers every day without being able to say how he would pay for it! He promised to make love to you twice a day, every day – but we both know that on many days he broke that promise, proving that your ex-boyfriend cannot be trusted.
All your ex-boyfriend could do was sing songs about you, make passionate love and shower you with materialist, capitalist bribes. Is this a boyfriend of substance, or is this a boyfriend who only knows how to tempt you with shim-sham and tricks?
My target of sharing our bed once a month is both practical and, in a very real sense, better suited to a fairer, stronger, tougher marriage. The other targets I have set, which form part of this agreement between us, include at least 2 minutes of conversation per week and a prudent and responsible amount of housekeeping money.
This is my very real commitment to you.
Certain unreliable sources suggest that, towards the end of the vows, Sarah was heard to be snoring from under the veil until Charlie Wheelan, disguised as a bridesmaid, elbowed her sharply in the ribs when it was her turn to speak.
This may or may not be true, you decide.
Of little interest to political historians and so largely not a matter of public record, the vows Gordon Brown made to Sarah Macaulay in 2000 at a surprise (and secret) ceremony in North Queensbury are published here for the first time
Sarah,
I make to you now a firm commitment and, in a real sense, a binding one. I commit to ensuring love remains at least at the 2000 level for the next 2 years, with an expectation that love will grow by 3.14% by the year 2003 – an end to boom and bust of love of your ex-boyfriend’s years.
In addition, I will ensure that where possible I will agree to honour you, in so far as it is prudent to do so.
I am also pleased to announce that before our first anniversary, I will, in line with estimates both have and hold you, irrespective of your medical needs or financial situation.
This is the firm, near rock solid commitment I make to you. Contrast that with the so-called promises of your ex-boyfriend: He promised you flowers every day without being able to say how he would pay for it! He promised to make love to you twice a day, every day – but we both know that on many days he broke that promise, proving that your ex-boyfriend cannot be trusted.
All your ex-boyfriend could do was sing songs about you, make passionate love and shower you with materialist, capitalist bribes. Is this a boyfriend of substance, or is this a boyfriend who only knows how to tempt you with shim-sham and tricks?
My target of sharing our bed once a month is both practical and, in a very real sense, better suited to a fairer, stronger, tougher marriage. The other targets I have set, which form part of this agreement between us, include at least 2 minutes of conversation per week and a prudent and responsible amount of housekeeping money.
This is my very real commitment to you.
Certain unreliable sources suggest that, towards the end of the vows, Sarah was heard to be snoring from under the veil until Charlie Wheelan, disguised as a bridesmaid, elbowed her sharply in the ribs when it was her turn to speak.
Would you go this far to escape your debts?
I don't know if this is true or not, but you never know.
The following is taken from this article;
Man had sex change to escape debt collectors
A man from the West Midlands, who was believed to have debts of up to £50,000, had a sex change in a desperate bid to avoid debt collectors.
The man, who cannot be named, had got into so much debt that he decided to switch identities completely.
Actress Sarah Thom revealed that she found out about the man after speaking to workers at the Wolverhampton Credit Union to research her role playing a debt-ridden cleaner in a touring play called Forever in Your Debt.
She said that she met up with workers at the union – which provides financial advice and loans to members – who revealed its most extreme cases of debt to her.
One was the case of man from the West Midlands area who decided to have a sex change in a bid to dodge debt collectors.
The man is believed to have gone through with the operation, but is now thought to be in the process of sorting out his debts and paying off his creditors.
He is thought to have built up the massive debt – around £50,000 – after falling behind on his mortgage payments and credit card bills after losing his job.
It was also revealed that the owner of a 99p store in Wolverhampton had to shut down after penny-pinching customers demanded 1p change, while another man took a job as a debt collector only to have to hassle his own family for repayments.
Ms Thom, said: "The thing I picked up was the humour people have at the point of tragedy."
This is a bit unbelievable, but I thought I would share it.
The following is taken from this article;
Man had sex change to escape debt collectors
A man from the West Midlands, who was believed to have debts of up to £50,000, had a sex change in a desperate bid to avoid debt collectors.
The man, who cannot be named, had got into so much debt that he decided to switch identities completely.
Actress Sarah Thom revealed that she found out about the man after speaking to workers at the Wolverhampton Credit Union to research her role playing a debt-ridden cleaner in a touring play called Forever in Your Debt.
She said that she met up with workers at the union – which provides financial advice and loans to members – who revealed its most extreme cases of debt to her.
One was the case of man from the West Midlands area who decided to have a sex change in a bid to dodge debt collectors.
The man is believed to have gone through with the operation, but is now thought to be in the process of sorting out his debts and paying off his creditors.
He is thought to have built up the massive debt – around £50,000 – after falling behind on his mortgage payments and credit card bills after losing his job.
It was also revealed that the owner of a 99p store in Wolverhampton had to shut down after penny-pinching customers demanded 1p change, while another man took a job as a debt collector only to have to hassle his own family for repayments.
Ms Thom, said: "The thing I picked up was the humour people have at the point of tragedy."
This is a bit unbelievable, but I thought I would share it.
Thursday, 18 March 2010
Why have BASSA changed their Logo?
In December I blogged about the Bassa, Union's, The British Airlines Stewards and Stewardesses Association, logo (Part of the Unite union) being very similar to the picture of the WW2 picture from Iwo Jima.
See blog entry below;
http://mythoughtsmycountry.blogspot.com/2009/12/i-was-wondering.html
Iwo Jima picture from http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media.php?id=1254
Bassa Picture from union site in December.
Notice the difference. They have just imposed themselves over the brave men who fought at Iwo Jima.
In my opinion that is so wrong in so many ways.
The reason i am re blogging about the pictures is because of the American union 'The Teamsters' were showing support for the unite union. I was wondering if the Teamsters would be so supportive of the Unite union if they knew what logo the BASSA union (part of the Unite union) were using.
I thought i would check again if the logo was being used before i blogged about it again, guess what I found? Take a look.
Picture taken from the BASSA union site
They have changed it, but it is still taken from the Iwo Jima picture.
They should change it completely.
People died fighting at Iwo Jima, and a union shouldn't be able to use an image of their sacrifice.
I would like to ask the union bosses a question.
If you go on strike, will you 'sacrifice' your salary while your members are on strike?
See blog entry below;
http://mythoughtsmycountry.blogspot.com/2009/12/i-was-wondering.html
Iwo Jima picture from http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media.php?id=1254
Bassa Picture from union site in December.
Notice the difference. They have just imposed themselves over the brave men who fought at Iwo Jima.
In my opinion that is so wrong in so many ways.
The reason i am re blogging about the pictures is because of the American union 'The Teamsters' were showing support for the unite union. I was wondering if the Teamsters would be so supportive of the Unite union if they knew what logo the BASSA union (part of the Unite union) were using.
I thought i would check again if the logo was being used before i blogged about it again, guess what I found? Take a look.
Picture taken from the BASSA union siteThey have changed it, but it is still taken from the Iwo Jima picture.
They should change it completely.
People died fighting at Iwo Jima, and a union shouldn't be able to use an image of their sacrifice.
I would like to ask the union bosses a question.
If you go on strike, will you 'sacrifice' your salary while your members are on strike?
Wednesday, 17 March 2010
Nick Griffin has his nose in the trough
Thanks to Old Holborn for finding this article
BNP chief Nick Griffin claims £200,000 Euro expenses
An extract;
BNP leader Nick Griffin was accused of joining “the expenses gravy train” today after it emerged that he has claimed hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The British National Party chief, who was elected last year as Euro MP for the North West of England, has submitted claims for more than £200,000 for his work in Brussels.
The costs, which come on top of his £82,000 MEP salary, include some £18,000 in “consultancy fees” and £10,000 in “agent fees”.
He attacked MPs for being troughers on expenses, so what does he do when he gets elected?
He was elected to look after the constituents of the north west, but he is more interested in filling his pockets with taxpayers money.
He is even worse than most of the MPs in Westminster, because he has claimed a hell of a lot more in 1 year than a lot of the MPs have claimed in 4 years.
I wonder what his constituents feel about this?
BNP chief Nick Griffin claims £200,000 Euro expenses
An extract;
BNP leader Nick Griffin was accused of joining “the expenses gravy train” today after it emerged that he has claimed hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The British National Party chief, who was elected last year as Euro MP for the North West of England, has submitted claims for more than £200,000 for his work in Brussels.
The costs, which come on top of his £82,000 MEP salary, include some £18,000 in “consultancy fees” and £10,000 in “agent fees”.
He attacked MPs for being troughers on expenses, so what does he do when he gets elected?
He was elected to look after the constituents of the north west, but he is more interested in filling his pockets with taxpayers money.
He is even worse than most of the MPs in Westminster, because he has claimed a hell of a lot more in 1 year than a lot of the MPs have claimed in 4 years.
I wonder what his constituents feel about this?
United in Support of Labour?
This is taken from Anna Raccoon's Blog
Click to enlarge.
Congratulations to The Daily Referendum for unearthing this gem.
My comments in Italics.
66% of Unite members would not vote Labour if a General Election was called today.
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 32% of Unite members believe that the Labour party share their values
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 25% of Unite members believe that the Labour party leadership is honest and principled
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 30% of Unite members believe that the Labour party leadership is competent and capable.
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 27% of Unite members believe that Gordon Brown is the right person to lead Britain forward after the next general election (Cameron 37%)
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
58% of Unite members think that Gordon Brown is bad for them and their families
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
58% of Unite members think that Gordon Brown is not up to the job of being Prime Minister
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 36% of Unite members believe that it was right for the union to donate £500,000 to Labour in the last three months.
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 31% of Unite members believe that it is right for the union to donate any further large donations to the Labour party.
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
59% of Unite members describe themselves as “moving away from the Labour party”
Then why are all 2 million member expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
HALF the Cabinet, including Gordon Brown and 12 of his ministers, are bankrolled in their constituencies by Unite.
Unite in the form of Charlie Whelan, against the wishes of their members.
One man’s agenda.
Isn’t that their objection to Lord Ashcroft?
I was only young in the 70's and at the time I didn't know how bad it was. In the 70's the Labour government was basically being run by the unions.
Looking at Labour now and Labour in the 70's, there isn't that much difference.
Click to enlarge.
Congratulations to The Daily Referendum for unearthing this gem.
My comments in Italics.
66% of Unite members would not vote Labour if a General Election was called today.
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 32% of Unite members believe that the Labour party share their values
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 25% of Unite members believe that the Labour party leadership is honest and principled
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 30% of Unite members believe that the Labour party leadership is competent and capable.
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 27% of Unite members believe that Gordon Brown is the right person to lead Britain forward after the next general election (Cameron 37%)
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
58% of Unite members think that Gordon Brown is bad for them and their families
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
58% of Unite members think that Gordon Brown is not up to the job of being Prime Minister
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 36% of Unite members believe that it was right for the union to donate £500,000 to Labour in the last three months.
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
Only 31% of Unite members believe that it is right for the union to donate any further large donations to the Labour party.
Then why are all 2 million members expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
59% of Unite members describe themselves as “moving away from the Labour party”
Then why are all 2 million member expected to pay £7.12 a year each to support the Labour Party?
HALF the Cabinet, including Gordon Brown and 12 of his ministers, are bankrolled in their constituencies by Unite.
Unite in the form of Charlie Whelan, against the wishes of their members.
One man’s agenda.
Isn’t that their objection to Lord Ashcroft?
I was only young in the 70's and at the time I didn't know how bad it was. In the 70's the Labour government was basically being run by the unions.
Looking at Labour now and Labour in the 70's, there isn't that much difference.
UNITE UNDER LABOUR',
OR IS IT
'LABOUR UNDER UNITE?
Tuesday, 16 March 2010
Taking Liberties
Labour has taken 13 years of diabolical liberties with Britain
Individualism and autonomy used to be prized – now they are held in contempt, argues Simon Heffer
That is the headline to this article.
An extract;
A danger of the Government's having made such a mess of the economy is that one risks forgetting all the other horrors for which it is responsible. Between now and the election I shall make a point of discussing some of these other factors that an intelligent voter should want to consider before casting his or her ballot. Despite stiff competition from matters like Europe, immigration, law and order and the near-destruction of our education system, one is perhaps worse than all the others: the insidious and at times quite terrifying assault on our civil liberties.
Gordon Brown tells us not to look at the past, but to look to the future. I wonder why that is?
Labour have taken this country to the cleaners.
In my opinion Labour are those criminals who knock on an elderly persons door and say they have seen some damage on their house and will repair it for £100.
Then, they say they found some more damage and bill the owner £1500+.
That is just what they have done to the finances of this country.
I'll let Simon Heffer tell you about the liberties we have lost
The Government has created 4,300 new offences since it came to office. Many of these are either absurd (such as making it a crime to use a nuclear weapon) or they duplicate laws on the statute book. Some would say this highlights the ignorance of those who govern us. Maybe it does; but I would argue, too, that it shows their insatiable hunger for control.
In the long years of Tory rule, those who reminded the electorate that with a Labour government you also got socialist control were dismissed as scaremongers. However, it is true, and we now see it is true. We live in a country where harmless people taking pictures of cathedrals are warned off by police invoking anti-terrorism laws; where the same legislation is used to regulate the positioning of wheelie bins; where smoking is banned even in public places whose owners wish to allow it; where the hunting of vermin is banned even on the land of those who wish to have it hunted. All these invasions of individual autonomy have taken place since 1997.
It could have been worse. We could have had identity cards, forcing a citizen to prove his or her right to be here, or to admit who he or she is, despite having committed no offence. We could have had a national DNA database. We could have had a law that prevented comedians telling jokes about religion. We could have had the restriction of jury trials. We could have had people locked up without trial for 90 days because the police are incapable of finding any evidence upon which to convict them of something. We could have criminalised people for being nutters, for that is one of the best words to describe those poisonous idiots who claim Auschwitz was just a film set and the genocide of the Jews didn't happen. All these things have been discussed or proposed by Labour in varying degrees of seriousness, but – so far – have not been inflicted on our people. However, they show a certain, and unpleasant, cast of mind.
As it is, enough has been done by the state to remove our autonomy. We are discouraged from having opinions of our own, especially on moral or ethical matters, and certainly from expressing them. It is frowned on to be opposed to abortion; or to believe homosexual partnerships to be lacking in equivalence to marriage; or to imagine that stable family units with both a mother and a father are superior, generally, to those that lack one or the other; or to imagine that married families might last better than unmarried ones; or to have any sort of perceived privilege, whether it be through wealth, hard work, luck or simply having the right outlook on life or the right sort of parents.
In Miss Harman's insane view the state can, indeed – and should – eliminate all these factors, or work to compensate those who do not have them. This can only be done at the cost of autonomy: at the cost of people being allowed to decide what in their lives is valuable, and living their lives in accordance with those decisions. We are more regulated, more policed, more restricted than in living memory, except in war.
This is the natural consequence of having politicians infected with a doctrine that office is about the power to prevent rather than about the power to enable. They are also politicians who restrict the many, without a thought for their liberty, in order to try to control the behaviour of a few. Individualism and autonomy used to be prized rights of our people. Now they are held in contempt by our governors. If we seek reasons not to give Labour another term in office, this wanton theft of our liberties should be high among them.
Labour has ruined this country, but the country isn't lost.
We need to show Labour that we no longer believe them or believe in them.
Labour need to be sent back to the stone age in the election.
Individualism and autonomy used to be prized – now they are held in contempt, argues Simon Heffer
That is the headline to this article.
An extract;
A danger of the Government's having made such a mess of the economy is that one risks forgetting all the other horrors for which it is responsible. Between now and the election I shall make a point of discussing some of these other factors that an intelligent voter should want to consider before casting his or her ballot. Despite stiff competition from matters like Europe, immigration, law and order and the near-destruction of our education system, one is perhaps worse than all the others: the insidious and at times quite terrifying assault on our civil liberties.
Gordon Brown tells us not to look at the past, but to look to the future. I wonder why that is?
Labour have taken this country to the cleaners.
In my opinion Labour are those criminals who knock on an elderly persons door and say they have seen some damage on their house and will repair it for £100.
Then, they say they found some more damage and bill the owner £1500+.
That is just what they have done to the finances of this country.
I'll let Simon Heffer tell you about the liberties we have lost
The Government has created 4,300 new offences since it came to office. Many of these are either absurd (such as making it a crime to use a nuclear weapon) or they duplicate laws on the statute book. Some would say this highlights the ignorance of those who govern us. Maybe it does; but I would argue, too, that it shows their insatiable hunger for control.
In the long years of Tory rule, those who reminded the electorate that with a Labour government you also got socialist control were dismissed as scaremongers. However, it is true, and we now see it is true. We live in a country where harmless people taking pictures of cathedrals are warned off by police invoking anti-terrorism laws; where the same legislation is used to regulate the positioning of wheelie bins; where smoking is banned even in public places whose owners wish to allow it; where the hunting of vermin is banned even on the land of those who wish to have it hunted. All these invasions of individual autonomy have taken place since 1997.
It could have been worse. We could have had identity cards, forcing a citizen to prove his or her right to be here, or to admit who he or she is, despite having committed no offence. We could have had a national DNA database. We could have had a law that prevented comedians telling jokes about religion. We could have had the restriction of jury trials. We could have had people locked up without trial for 90 days because the police are incapable of finding any evidence upon which to convict them of something. We could have criminalised people for being nutters, for that is one of the best words to describe those poisonous idiots who claim Auschwitz was just a film set and the genocide of the Jews didn't happen. All these things have been discussed or proposed by Labour in varying degrees of seriousness, but – so far – have not been inflicted on our people. However, they show a certain, and unpleasant, cast of mind.
As it is, enough has been done by the state to remove our autonomy. We are discouraged from having opinions of our own, especially on moral or ethical matters, and certainly from expressing them. It is frowned on to be opposed to abortion; or to believe homosexual partnerships to be lacking in equivalence to marriage; or to imagine that stable family units with both a mother and a father are superior, generally, to those that lack one or the other; or to imagine that married families might last better than unmarried ones; or to have any sort of perceived privilege, whether it be through wealth, hard work, luck or simply having the right outlook on life or the right sort of parents.
In Miss Harman's insane view the state can, indeed – and should – eliminate all these factors, or work to compensate those who do not have them. This can only be done at the cost of autonomy: at the cost of people being allowed to decide what in their lives is valuable, and living their lives in accordance with those decisions. We are more regulated, more policed, more restricted than in living memory, except in war.
This is the natural consequence of having politicians infected with a doctrine that office is about the power to prevent rather than about the power to enable. They are also politicians who restrict the many, without a thought for their liberty, in order to try to control the behaviour of a few. Individualism and autonomy used to be prized rights of our people. Now they are held in contempt by our governors. If we seek reasons not to give Labour another term in office, this wanton theft of our liberties should be high among them.
Labour has ruined this country, but the country isn't lost.
We need to show Labour that we no longer believe them or believe in them.
Labour need to be sent back to the stone age in the election.
Saturday, 13 March 2010
How to commit fraud and get away with it.
Of all the people who I thought would be charged with fraud Baroness Uddin would be high on the list.
According to the rules of the Hose of Lords, you only have to visit the 'main home' once a month for it to qualify as your main home.
An extract from an article in the Telegraph;
She was cleared of wrongdoing over her expenses claims after prosecutors admitted they could not press charges because House of Lords rules were so vague.
But Keir Starmer said that the Lords' interpretation meant it would “almost inevitably be necessary for the prosecution to prove, to the criminal standard” that any peer had not even visited their main home once a month.
“That presents a very real difficulty and we considered whether it would be open to the Crown Prosecution Service to advance a different definition of ‘only or main residence’ in any criminal proceedings. However, after careful consideration, we concluded that such a course would not be open to us,” he said.
Several other peers, including Lord Paul, have also been told they will not face any further action.
Her 'main home' was an empty flat for crying out loud. She didn't live there, there wasn't any furniture in the flat. She was living just 4 miles away from Parliament.
In the real world where you and I live that is fraud, so how can they get away with it?
We can't even vote Baroness Uddin out. She can carry on claiming expenses out of the taxpayers pockets because as long as she visits that flat just once a month she can claim it as her main home.
We are getting ripped off on a serious scale.
She should be stripped of her title and thrown out of the Lords.
According to the rules of the Hose of Lords, you only have to visit the 'main home' once a month for it to qualify as your main home.
An extract from an article in the Telegraph;
She was cleared of wrongdoing over her expenses claims after prosecutors admitted they could not press charges because House of Lords rules were so vague.
But Keir Starmer said that the Lords' interpretation meant it would “almost inevitably be necessary for the prosecution to prove, to the criminal standard” that any peer had not even visited their main home once a month.
“That presents a very real difficulty and we considered whether it would be open to the Crown Prosecution Service to advance a different definition of ‘only or main residence’ in any criminal proceedings. However, after careful consideration, we concluded that such a course would not be open to us,” he said.
Several other peers, including Lord Paul, have also been told they will not face any further action.
Her 'main home' was an empty flat for crying out loud. She didn't live there, there wasn't any furniture in the flat. She was living just 4 miles away from Parliament.
In the real world where you and I live that is fraud, so how can they get away with it?
We can't even vote Baroness Uddin out. She can carry on claiming expenses out of the taxpayers pockets because as long as she visits that flat just once a month she can claim it as her main home.
We are getting ripped off on a serious scale.
She should be stripped of her title and thrown out of the Lords.
Friday, 12 March 2010
A Slogan For Labour
'UNITE UNDER LABOUR'
'OOPS I MEAN LABOUR UNDER UNITE'
'STRIKING AT THE HEART OF BRITAIN'
Come The Revolution By Anna Raccoon
The following blog is copied from Anna Raccoon's Blog.
http://www.annaraccoon.com/
You can find this Blog Here
Come the Revolution!
by Anna Raccoon on March 12,
The Blogosphere is fundamentally different from the Main Stream Media.
It is the aggregate mass of thousands of committed individuals, sitting in front of their computers, who wish to make their voices heard in the political dialogue which traditionally, only hears their voice during an election.
This is not a new phenomenon. It used to be called pamphleteering. Prynne, Bastwick and Burton were seventeenth century ‘bloggers’ who contributed to the downfall of the Stuart monarchy.
Modern historians place great weight on the pamphleteering that went on in the 1630’s. Then as now the established power first ignored, then repressed the clamour from the pamphleteers, they were unable to control the new ‘medium’.
In the end refusal to change or compromise brought down Charles I
Many bloggers are ‘experts’ in their field, carving a thousand new facets onto an issue; the Blogs can, and do, rapidly expose a lie by Government; Newspapers no longer campaign and are easily controlled by Government, through D notices, or a refusal of access to the corridors of power.
Bloggers are noisy, rumbustious, argumentative, anarchic, and autonomous. They don’t speak with the smooth, editorially controlled, legally sanctified, grammatically correct, voice of the National Newspapers, or the Television Stations.
They shout, from 25 million different electronic soap-boxes, of the injustices they perceive in their small corner of the global world. Unpaid, sometimes unheard, but, critically, electronically linked to each other.
That link is essential, for occasionally a story gains momentum, catches the group imagination and then builds up speed exponentially, amplifying the original lone voice to an almighty bellow.
So it was that when I wrote of Nick Hogan, the Manchester publican jailed for six months for being unable to pay the full £11,600 fine imposed on him when some of his customer’s defied the ‘no-smoking’ ban, it was read not only by my little band of readers, but by other bloggers linked to me.
A fellow blogger, Old Holborn, read my post and offered to arrange a collection point for donations via his own Blog. That blog post was, in turn, read by Guido Fawkes, who relayed it to his own million plus readers.
This was not a campaign conducted by the smoothly professional spin-meisters of the main political parties, or campaigning organisations, with stories carefully planted in friendly newspapers, written by highly trained professionals. There were no government ministers wheeled out to TV stations to tell the obliging public what they should think.
This was not the ‘Pro-Smoking’ lobby shouting, this was the authentic, raw voice of thousands of ordinary men and women who felt that the State had over-stepped the mark, and was making a political point by jailing this man.
The outrage I had felt at the injustice imposed on Nick Hogan was being amplified beyond my wildest imagination – Bloggers across the globe were putting their hand into their wallet and forwarding money to the ‘Free Nick Hogan’ fund.
I lost count of the number of e-mails I received telling me ‘I don’t mind the smoking ban myself, but this is wrong’. Or ‘this man has been jailed for refusing to act as an unpaid policeman for the State’.
Money came in from all over the world, the International Blogosphere had reacted in a truly heart warming way, outraged at the behaviour of the State.
On Wednesday we succeeded, and with the good wishes of thousands of ordinary men and women, equally battered by the recession, Nick Hogan is once more in the bosom of his family, able to support his wife Denise and their children.
Thank-you Blogosphere – and well done.
The fact that so many of you responded is a powerful message from the voting public that politicians would be well advised to heed. The Blogosphere will not be controlled by politicians, bound up in regulations, throttled by impenetrable legislation. It is not a single target that a ‘D’ notice can be fired at. We are not beholden to advertisers.
We are the authentic, unfiltered, voice of your electorate.
Very soon, we may be more than that. Today, Nick Hogan has phoned me and told me that he has accepted an invitation to stand for Parliament. I am delighted for him. I hope he is successful. Parliament needs men and women who know what it is to belong to the great mass of ordinary people – not career political aides promoted to candidacy, not union representatives looking for a national soapbox to shout from – from real human beings who have had to battle the effects of the recession, who know what bankruptcy really means, who know how hard it is to run a business when you are throttled with legislation, who know what it means to sit up at night doing the Vat returns, real people.
In the meantime, Russia’s main television channel is flying into Manchester to interview Nick Hogan as part of a special investigation* into the totalitarian regime that they see emerging in Europe – Oh! The irony! Post Perestroika Russia sees Britain as an oppressive regime! Was it only yesterday that we were lecturing them on Freedom?
For the British, it is not a physical wall such as that in Berlin that we need to pull down, but the psychological wall between the career politicians and the 60 million people that they seek to rule. They need our consent to do so.
Yesterday, Old Holborn was outside Westminster Magistrates court where four politicians, charged with false accounting, sought permission not to stand in the dock as common criminals, they were, so they believed, entitled to be treated differently from any other thief.
They just don’t get it.
My politics are not Nick’s; he knows that, we can politely agree to disagree. Until the day arrives when Libertarians are sufficient in number to field national candidates, I shall be delighted to settle for helping a real human being to enter parliament, it is what this country needs – even if I can’t vote for him.
You can expect a blog post next week from Nick explaining his political beliefs – and some more from politicians of a different hue. These are interesting times ahead.
*The video will be available here – just as soon as someone with the capability to put the English translation which I shall have, onto a video, and upload it to Youtube – any offers? Way beyond my technical ability. My e-mail address is on the contact page.
http://www.annaraccoon.com/
You can find this Blog Here
Come the Revolution!
by Anna Raccoon on March 12,
The Blogosphere is fundamentally different from the Main Stream Media.
It is the aggregate mass of thousands of committed individuals, sitting in front of their computers, who wish to make their voices heard in the political dialogue which traditionally, only hears their voice during an election.
This is not a new phenomenon. It used to be called pamphleteering. Prynne, Bastwick and Burton were seventeenth century ‘bloggers’ who contributed to the downfall of the Stuart monarchy.
Modern historians place great weight on the pamphleteering that went on in the 1630’s. Then as now the established power first ignored, then repressed the clamour from the pamphleteers, they were unable to control the new ‘medium’.
In the end refusal to change or compromise brought down Charles I
Many bloggers are ‘experts’ in their field, carving a thousand new facets onto an issue; the Blogs can, and do, rapidly expose a lie by Government; Newspapers no longer campaign and are easily controlled by Government, through D notices, or a refusal of access to the corridors of power.
Bloggers are noisy, rumbustious, argumentative, anarchic, and autonomous. They don’t speak with the smooth, editorially controlled, legally sanctified, grammatically correct, voice of the National Newspapers, or the Television Stations.
They shout, from 25 million different electronic soap-boxes, of the injustices they perceive in their small corner of the global world. Unpaid, sometimes unheard, but, critically, electronically linked to each other.
That link is essential, for occasionally a story gains momentum, catches the group imagination and then builds up speed exponentially, amplifying the original lone voice to an almighty bellow.
So it was that when I wrote of Nick Hogan, the Manchester publican jailed for six months for being unable to pay the full £11,600 fine imposed on him when some of his customer’s defied the ‘no-smoking’ ban, it was read not only by my little band of readers, but by other bloggers linked to me.
A fellow blogger, Old Holborn, read my post and offered to arrange a collection point for donations via his own Blog. That blog post was, in turn, read by Guido Fawkes, who relayed it to his own million plus readers.
This was not a campaign conducted by the smoothly professional spin-meisters of the main political parties, or campaigning organisations, with stories carefully planted in friendly newspapers, written by highly trained professionals. There were no government ministers wheeled out to TV stations to tell the obliging public what they should think.
This was not the ‘Pro-Smoking’ lobby shouting, this was the authentic, raw voice of thousands of ordinary men and women who felt that the State had over-stepped the mark, and was making a political point by jailing this man.
The outrage I had felt at the injustice imposed on Nick Hogan was being amplified beyond my wildest imagination – Bloggers across the globe were putting their hand into their wallet and forwarding money to the ‘Free Nick Hogan’ fund.
I lost count of the number of e-mails I received telling me ‘I don’t mind the smoking ban myself, but this is wrong’. Or ‘this man has been jailed for refusing to act as an unpaid policeman for the State’.
Money came in from all over the world, the International Blogosphere had reacted in a truly heart warming way, outraged at the behaviour of the State.
On Wednesday we succeeded, and with the good wishes of thousands of ordinary men and women, equally battered by the recession, Nick Hogan is once more in the bosom of his family, able to support his wife Denise and their children.
Thank-you Blogosphere – and well done.
The fact that so many of you responded is a powerful message from the voting public that politicians would be well advised to heed. The Blogosphere will not be controlled by politicians, bound up in regulations, throttled by impenetrable legislation. It is not a single target that a ‘D’ notice can be fired at. We are not beholden to advertisers.
We are the authentic, unfiltered, voice of your electorate.
Very soon, we may be more than that. Today, Nick Hogan has phoned me and told me that he has accepted an invitation to stand for Parliament. I am delighted for him. I hope he is successful. Parliament needs men and women who know what it is to belong to the great mass of ordinary people – not career political aides promoted to candidacy, not union representatives looking for a national soapbox to shout from – from real human beings who have had to battle the effects of the recession, who know what bankruptcy really means, who know how hard it is to run a business when you are throttled with legislation, who know what it means to sit up at night doing the Vat returns, real people.
In the meantime, Russia’s main television channel is flying into Manchester to interview Nick Hogan as part of a special investigation* into the totalitarian regime that they see emerging in Europe – Oh! The irony! Post Perestroika Russia sees Britain as an oppressive regime! Was it only yesterday that we were lecturing them on Freedom?
For the British, it is not a physical wall such as that in Berlin that we need to pull down, but the psychological wall between the career politicians and the 60 million people that they seek to rule. They need our consent to do so.
Yesterday, Old Holborn was outside Westminster Magistrates court where four politicians, charged with false accounting, sought permission not to stand in the dock as common criminals, they were, so they believed, entitled to be treated differently from any other thief.
They just don’t get it.
My politics are not Nick’s; he knows that, we can politely agree to disagree. Until the day arrives when Libertarians are sufficient in number to field national candidates, I shall be delighted to settle for helping a real human being to enter parliament, it is what this country needs – even if I can’t vote for him.
You can expect a blog post next week from Nick explaining his political beliefs – and some more from politicians of a different hue. These are interesting times ahead.
*The video will be available here – just as soon as someone with the capability to put the English translation which I shall have, onto a video, and upload it to Youtube – any offers? Way beyond my technical ability. My e-mail address is on the contact page.
School Admission Fraud
Ed Balls orders crackdown on school admissions fraud
Parents face random checks on their homes as part of a Government crackdown on school admissions fraud.
That is the headline to this article.
What Ed Balls has to ask himself is why are so many people committing this admissions fraud.
Is it because parents want their children to have the best education they can.
When I was a kid some schools were good, some were better. What all the schools did though was to make sure the children knew the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic.
Today we have failing schools with children running riot in the classroom, making it so hard for the children who want to learn almost impossible.
Is it any wonder why parents might want to commit admissions fraud.
Parents face random checks on their homes as part of a Government crackdown on school admissions fraud.
That is the headline to this article.
What Ed Balls has to ask himself is why are so many people committing this admissions fraud.
Is it because parents want their children to have the best education they can.
When I was a kid some schools were good, some were better. What all the schools did though was to make sure the children knew the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic.
Today we have failing schools with children running riot in the classroom, making it so hard for the children who want to learn almost impossible.
Is it any wonder why parents might want to commit admissions fraud.
Have a read of this Headline.
Liam Byrne: No new tax rises under Labour
Labour has pledged to impose no new tax rises despite being warned that increases are the only way to cut record public debt.
Now ask your self this.
How is Labour going to cut the debt the country is in by not raising taxes and by not cutting any front line staff?
An extract;
Last night, the Institute of Fiscal Studies warned that Labour would not be able to keep its promise of protecting front line services and jobs under its current deficit reduction plan.
In his pre-Budget report in December, Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, said that the Government would halve the £178 billion deficit in four years.
Another extract;
Mr Byrne is seen as a close ally of Gordon Brown and his comments are likely to reflect the wishes of No 10.
Mr Darling is likely to want to keep options open for his vital pre-election Budget.
In my opinion, Alistair Darling wants to do what is right for the country, but is being undermined by Gordon Brown and his allies.
Alistair Darling knows that hard choices need to be made and that front line services would probably have to be cut, but he is being forced into a corner by these quotes from Gordon Brown and his allies.
I know that life is going to be financially hard in the next few years, and i think a lot of other people think so to, but if i am honest i don't think Gordon Brown thinks so, or at least doesn't show it.
When you are in debt you make sure there is enough money for the essentials and you stop, or reduce the luxuries you have and you cut back on your spending.
I don't think Gordon Brown gets that.
Labour has pledged to impose no new tax rises despite being warned that increases are the only way to cut record public debt.
Now ask your self this.
How is Labour going to cut the debt the country is in by not raising taxes and by not cutting any front line staff?
An extract;
Last night, the Institute of Fiscal Studies warned that Labour would not be able to keep its promise of protecting front line services and jobs under its current deficit reduction plan.
In his pre-Budget report in December, Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, said that the Government would halve the £178 billion deficit in four years.
Another extract;
Mr Byrne is seen as a close ally of Gordon Brown and his comments are likely to reflect the wishes of No 10.
Mr Darling is likely to want to keep options open for his vital pre-election Budget.
In my opinion, Alistair Darling wants to do what is right for the country, but is being undermined by Gordon Brown and his allies.
Alistair Darling knows that hard choices need to be made and that front line services would probably have to be cut, but he is being forced into a corner by these quotes from Gordon Brown and his allies.
I know that life is going to be financially hard in the next few years, and i think a lot of other people think so to, but if i am honest i don't think Gordon Brown thinks so, or at least doesn't show it.
When you are in debt you make sure there is enough money for the essentials and you stop, or reduce the luxuries you have and you cut back on your spending.
I don't think Gordon Brown gets that.
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Gordon Brown and his Promises
I like Jeff Randall, he really delivers the truth.
Jeff Randall's latest article is about Gordon Brown and what he said in his speech earlier this week, one of which was his character.
I could comment about the article but Jeff Randall says it all.
Gordon Brown has terrible form when it comes to keeping his promises
Jeff Randall says that rewriting history cannot save the Prime Minister - or Britain - from his failures.
An extract;
His accompanying comments about "character" appeared to have been scripted by a comedian in need of some fresh material.
"For better or worse, with me what you see is what you get," said Mr Brown. It is a line so at odds with reality, so manifestly untrue, so utterly ridiculous that one barely knows where to start challenging it.
Was this the same Mr Brown whose shameless evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry was dismissed by Army chiefs as "disingenuous"? The same Mr Brown who unleashed the "forces of hell" on his own chancellor? The same Mr Brown who cannot walk past a national statistic without rebasing its measurement for narrow political advantage (crime, inflation, growth)?
Another extract;
In each of his five budgets between 2003 and 2007, Mr Brown overspent on average by more than £30 billion, clocking up about £160 billion of debt.
What's more, the pledge he made to me in 1998 to lay "the foundations for long-term industrial and economic success" came to less than nothing.
Under Labour, Britain has shed manufacturing jobs at an alarming rate: about 1.7 million have disappeared since 1997. In that year, manufacturing accounted for 20.9 per cent of the United Kingdom's GDP. By the time of the last election, it was down to 13.6 per cent. Today, it is lower still.
Read the whole article.
In my opinion Jeff Randall nails Gordon Brown for what he really is. Some one who manipulates people, figures and statistics to show him in a good light. See my previous blog about how he manipulated the funding of the military.
He cannot be re- elected, then again he wasn't even elected Labour leader let alone elected to the position of Prime Minister in the first place.
Jeff Randall's latest article is about Gordon Brown and what he said in his speech earlier this week, one of which was his character.
I could comment about the article but Jeff Randall says it all.
Gordon Brown has terrible form when it comes to keeping his promises
Jeff Randall says that rewriting history cannot save the Prime Minister - or Britain - from his failures.
An extract;
His accompanying comments about "character" appeared to have been scripted by a comedian in need of some fresh material.
"For better or worse, with me what you see is what you get," said Mr Brown. It is a line so at odds with reality, so manifestly untrue, so utterly ridiculous that one barely knows where to start challenging it.
Was this the same Mr Brown whose shameless evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry was dismissed by Army chiefs as "disingenuous"? The same Mr Brown who unleashed the "forces of hell" on his own chancellor? The same Mr Brown who cannot walk past a national statistic without rebasing its measurement for narrow political advantage (crime, inflation, growth)?
Another extract;
In each of his five budgets between 2003 and 2007, Mr Brown overspent on average by more than £30 billion, clocking up about £160 billion of debt.
What's more, the pledge he made to me in 1998 to lay "the foundations for long-term industrial and economic success" came to less than nothing.
Under Labour, Britain has shed manufacturing jobs at an alarming rate: about 1.7 million have disappeared since 1997. In that year, manufacturing accounted for 20.9 per cent of the United Kingdom's GDP. By the time of the last election, it was down to 13.6 per cent. Today, it is lower still.
Read the whole article.
In my opinion Jeff Randall nails Gordon Brown for what he really is. Some one who manipulates people, figures and statistics to show him in a good light. See my previous blog about how he manipulated the funding of the military.
He cannot be re- elected, then again he wasn't even elected Labour leader let alone elected to the position of Prime Minister in the first place.
Is Gordon Brown Lying about the Defence Budget?
Thanks to Daily Referendum for this blog.
Watch this video and ask yourself, is Gordon Brown Lying about the defense budget?
If Gordon Brown has manipulated the figures in this, what else is he capable of?
Watch this video and ask yourself, is Gordon Brown Lying about the defense budget?
If Gordon Brown has manipulated the figures in this, what else is he capable of?
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
STAFFORD EPILOGUE: THE MADNESS THAT IS THE SECRET FAMILY COURTS SYSTEM
This is taken from another blog called THE SLOG. I recommend you have a read of his blog, it is very informative and very interesting.
You can read this blog here, but i have copied it here as well.
Last week, the Slog revealed several aspects of secrecy surrounding medical, social work, psychiatric and judicial personnel. We end the series today with the maddest case of the lot.
I can't show you the baby in the above picture - even though the shot was taken three years ago, and the kid would be unrecognisable.
I can't tell you the name of either mother or child. I can't tell you the names of any of the controlling clowns who have made this mother's life a misery.
I can't tell you the name of the judge who consigned her into the hands of a bent psychiatrist.
I can't tell you the name of the social worker and judge who preferred, as a custodian of the child's welfare, a man with a history of violence (on remand for shoving a broken beer glass into the face of a fellow customer in the local) to this mother.
I can't tell you the name of this violent thug, nor give you the identity of the child he deserted when it was a three-month foetus.
I can't tell you the name of the social work director who deliberately stalled on showing the mother her case history notes; nor the name of the lawyer who helped the mother put in a freedom of information request until this arrogant senior manager was forced by law to comply.
I can't tell you anything identifying this case until 2022. Because a judge (and guess what, I can't give you the name of this pillock either) has deemed it right and proper that I shouldn't.
This scandalous silence has been fixed - I use the word advisedly - on the ludicrous basis of protecting the infant child's identity. And although Jack Straw at long last has come to realise just how pernicious, illiberal and downright creepy the whole disgusting apparatus of Secret Family Courts is, his hands are increasingly tied by lobbying from the judiciary and social services professionals.
They simply do not have a leg to stand on. Time and again inquiries into the system have recommended that media reporting be allowed - while not including the names of victims. But a rearguard action against Straw's abysmally late conversion is now engaging in venom of the sort you'd expect. The sort spat out by unpleasant people desperate to hide evidence of cynical target-setting, corrupt use of funds, police collusion, incompetent or delusional social workers and yes, even paedophile judges.
What I can do, however, is give you the names of the two Government Ministers concerned who - despite endless promises since 2006 to members on all sides of both Houses of Parliament - have done three-fifths of Fanny Adams about any of it.
Harriet Harman and Ed Balls.
They are both overt or covert candidates for leadership of New Labour. They should be ashamed of themselves, but of course they are not - and nor will they be in the future. For they are the living proof of what's wrong with the UK: government by a selfish and heartless deranged minority at the expensive of the good and honest majority.
To bloggers everywhere: I really don't care if you won't give me a credit or link to this article. But I would be very happy if you'd give the details of this case enough publicity to ensure those who perpetuate the system are brought to justice at last. If we as an online community can't do that, then what on God's Earth are we for?
Posted by John Ward at 15:58
You can read this blog here, but i have copied it here as well.
Last week, the Slog revealed several aspects of secrecy surrounding medical, social work, psychiatric and judicial personnel. We end the series today with the maddest case of the lot.
I can't show you the baby in the above picture - even though the shot was taken three years ago, and the kid would be unrecognisable.
I can't tell you the name of either mother or child. I can't tell you the names of any of the controlling clowns who have made this mother's life a misery.
I can't tell you the name of the judge who consigned her into the hands of a bent psychiatrist.
I can't tell you the name of the social worker and judge who preferred, as a custodian of the child's welfare, a man with a history of violence (on remand for shoving a broken beer glass into the face of a fellow customer in the local) to this mother.
I can't tell you the name of this violent thug, nor give you the identity of the child he deserted when it was a three-month foetus.
I can't tell you the name of the social work director who deliberately stalled on showing the mother her case history notes; nor the name of the lawyer who helped the mother put in a freedom of information request until this arrogant senior manager was forced by law to comply.
I can't tell you anything identifying this case until 2022. Because a judge (and guess what, I can't give you the name of this pillock either) has deemed it right and proper that I shouldn't.
This scandalous silence has been fixed - I use the word advisedly - on the ludicrous basis of protecting the infant child's identity. And although Jack Straw at long last has come to realise just how pernicious, illiberal and downright creepy the whole disgusting apparatus of Secret Family Courts is, his hands are increasingly tied by lobbying from the judiciary and social services professionals.
They simply do not have a leg to stand on. Time and again inquiries into the system have recommended that media reporting be allowed - while not including the names of victims. But a rearguard action against Straw's abysmally late conversion is now engaging in venom of the sort you'd expect. The sort spat out by unpleasant people desperate to hide evidence of cynical target-setting, corrupt use of funds, police collusion, incompetent or delusional social workers and yes, even paedophile judges.
What I can do, however, is give you the names of the two Government Ministers concerned who - despite endless promises since 2006 to members on all sides of both Houses of Parliament - have done three-fifths of Fanny Adams about any of it.
Harriet Harman and Ed Balls.
They are both overt or covert candidates for leadership of New Labour. They should be ashamed of themselves, but of course they are not - and nor will they be in the future. For they are the living proof of what's wrong with the UK: government by a selfish and heartless deranged minority at the expensive of the good and honest majority.
To bloggers everywhere: I really don't care if you won't give me a credit or link to this article. But I would be very happy if you'd give the details of this case enough publicity to ensure those who perpetuate the system are brought to justice at last. If we as an online community can't do that, then what on God's Earth are we for?
Posted by John Ward at 15:58
Another Apology about failing to protect children
Just watching Sky News about the abuse of a family over 35 years
I have blogged about this before
They said in the press conference that they didn't have enough evidence that any abuse was happening, or that social workers suspected abuse but couldn't do anything.
Correct me if i am wrong, but in the 1980s didn't social workers take numerous children into care on very flimsy and wholly inaccurate evidence?
If i remembered correctly, then why didn't it happen here?
I know i don't know all the facts in this case, but all i hear every time is the same thing.
Lessons need to be learnt, and it should never happen again.
In 35 years how come nothing was done to protect these kids.
I have blogged about this before
They said in the press conference that they didn't have enough evidence that any abuse was happening, or that social workers suspected abuse but couldn't do anything.
Correct me if i am wrong, but in the 1980s didn't social workers take numerous children into care on very flimsy and wholly inaccurate evidence?
If i remembered correctly, then why didn't it happen here?
I know i don't know all the facts in this case, but all i hear every time is the same thing.
Lessons need to be learnt, and it should never happen again.
In 35 years how come nothing was done to protect these kids.
Who's the Chancellor?
Here are 2 headlines from articles;
Headline one;
Alistair Darling 'to announce date of the budget'
Alistair Darling is to announce the date of the budget this morning, the Treasury has disclosed.
Headline two;
Gordon Brown warns of 'choppy waters' ahead as he sets stage for May election
Gordon Brown has warned that "choppy waters" lie ahead on the path to economic recovery but insisted he has the "courage" to get the job done.
The Prime Minister used a speech to a City audience to announce that the Budget would be held in ''two weeks' time'' - March 24 - setting the stage for a May 6 general election.
Now I thought the person who announced the date of the budget would be the chancellor, but Gordon Brown announced it instead. It makes you wonder did Gordon Brown steal Alistair Darling's thunder.
Another thing to ponder, who will be writing the budget, Alistair Darling or Gordon Brown?
My prediction for the budget will be, more tax on the rich, more tax on the taxpaying workers, more tax on cars, more tax on home owners, but more benefits for the scroungers who refuse to work.
Headline one;
Alistair Darling 'to announce date of the budget'
Alistair Darling is to announce the date of the budget this morning, the Treasury has disclosed.
Headline two;
Gordon Brown warns of 'choppy waters' ahead as he sets stage for May election
Gordon Brown has warned that "choppy waters" lie ahead on the path to economic recovery but insisted he has the "courage" to get the job done.
The Prime Minister used a speech to a City audience to announce that the Budget would be held in ''two weeks' time'' - March 24 - setting the stage for a May 6 general election.
Now I thought the person who announced the date of the budget would be the chancellor, but Gordon Brown announced it instead. It makes you wonder did Gordon Brown steal Alistair Darling's thunder.
Another thing to ponder, who will be writing the budget, Alistair Darling or Gordon Brown?
My prediction for the budget will be, more tax on the rich, more tax on the taxpaying workers, more tax on cars, more tax on home owners, but more benefits for the scroungers who refuse to work.
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
A Video of Gordon Brown
Just found this video, The video has been out a while, you may of seen it before, but here it is.
People with a weak stomach should look away now.
People with a weak stomach should look away now.
Monday, 8 March 2010
Gordon Brown Has Lost All Credibility
First Gordon Brown gives 'evidence' at the Chilcot 'enquiry'.
Then he goes off to Afghanistan on a 'pre arranged' visit.
Now Gordon Brown is gagging news coming out of Afghanistan.
What else is this man capable of doing?
We have and always should have a free press, and although the press get it wrong sometimes, the press should have the freedom to report on news articles that are in the public's interest.
It shouldn't be gagged because bad news may hurt the government.
Then he goes off to Afghanistan on a 'pre arranged' visit.
Now Gordon Brown is gagging news coming out of Afghanistan.
What else is this man capable of doing?
We have and always should have a free press, and although the press get it wrong sometimes, the press should have the freedom to report on news articles that are in the public's interest.
It shouldn't be gagged because bad news may hurt the government.
Sunday, 7 March 2010
Jon Venables. My 2 cents
In 1993 Jon Venables and Robert Thompson lured away James Bulger and killed him.
They were found guilty and were sent to a young offenders institute.
In 2001 they were released on licence and, rightly or wrongly, they were given new identities at a cost of thousands of pounds to the taxpayer.
Jon Venables has now been taken back to prison due to 'allegedly' serious offences.
If they are serious offences and he is found guilty, then he shouldn't be given a new identity when he is up for release. He has given up that right and the taxpayer shouldn't have to pay again.
I thought he was meant to be closely watched by members of the probation service?
Just my 2 cents on the subject.
They were found guilty and were sent to a young offenders institute.
In 2001 they were released on licence and, rightly or wrongly, they were given new identities at a cost of thousands of pounds to the taxpayer.
Jon Venables has now been taken back to prison due to 'allegedly' serious offences.
If they are serious offences and he is found guilty, then he shouldn't be given a new identity when he is up for release. He has given up that right and the taxpayer shouldn't have to pay again.
I thought he was meant to be closely watched by members of the probation service?
Just my 2 cents on the subject.
The Royal Tournament
So many happy memories from when i was a kid.
In my opinion the reason Labour cancelled the Royal Tournament is not because it didn't make any money, it was because it made us proud of our Military and gave us pride in our country.
The Royal Tournament gave us a sense of pride in the history of this country.
I remember my dad taking me when i was about 14 years old, and i loved it. I went nearly every year after that, and i wanted to take my kids to the Royal Tournament, but it was cancelled in 1999.
I believe the politicians should have a serious look at restarting the Royal Tournament and give this country a sense of pride again. If they are worried about the cost then organise it for every 2 years.
Link to The Royal Tornament website
In my opinion the reason Labour cancelled the Royal Tournament is not because it didn't make any money, it was because it made us proud of our Military and gave us pride in our country.
The Royal Tournament gave us a sense of pride in the history of this country.
I remember my dad taking me when i was about 14 years old, and i loved it. I went nearly every year after that, and i wanted to take my kids to the Royal Tournament, but it was cancelled in 1999.
I believe the politicians should have a serious look at restarting the Royal Tournament and give this country a sense of pride again. If they are worried about the cost then organise it for every 2 years.
Link to The Royal Tornament website
Saturday, 6 March 2010
Publicity Stunt or Coincidence?
Is it just a coincidence that the very next day that Gordon Brown gives evidence at the Chilcot enquiry, he visits the troops in Afghanistan?
Does he think we're stupid enough to believe it when he says it isn't electioneering.
An extract from the article from Sky News;
Asked whether the trip amounted to electioneering, Mr Brown said: "I am here because I want to thank the British troops for their bravery, their dedication and their professionalism."
The trip came after Lord Boyce - who was the head of the military at the time of the Iraq invasion - attacked Mr Brown and said the Ministry of Defence was starved of funds.
G.O.T. has a blog about this subject and it says it all. Read what it says in the picture and ask yourself, What is Gordon Brown really doing in Afghanistan?
Just to warn you the blog does contain colourful language
Does he think we're stupid enough to believe it when he says it isn't electioneering.
An extract from the article from Sky News;
Asked whether the trip amounted to electioneering, Mr Brown said: "I am here because I want to thank the British troops for their bravery, their dedication and their professionalism."
The trip came after Lord Boyce - who was the head of the military at the time of the Iraq invasion - attacked Mr Brown and said the Ministry of Defence was starved of funds.
G.O.T. has a blog about this subject and it says it all. Read what it says in the picture and ask yourself, What is Gordon Brown really doing in Afghanistan?
Just to warn you the blog does contain colourful language
Who is the Biggest Crook?
Robert Maxwell took money from the pension fund of the Mirror group.
Gordon Brown took money from every pension fund in Britain.
So I ask you, who is the biggest crook?
Update:
I just watched the New Guy News and i have another spin on this.
Who is the biggest crook, Lord Paul (the Non Dom), Robert Maxwell or Gordon Brown?
Answer: Although all 3 took money from pension funds, Gordon Brown is the worst crook because Gordon Brown accepted money that could of been taken from another pension fund.
Gordon Brown took money from every pension fund in Britain.
So I ask you, who is the biggest crook?
Update:
I just watched the New Guy News and i have another spin on this.
Who is the biggest crook, Lord Paul (the Non Dom), Robert Maxwell or Gordon Brown?
Answer: Although all 3 took money from pension funds, Gordon Brown is the worst crook because Gordon Brown accepted money that could of been taken from another pension fund.
Who is the more believable?
Gordon Brown said:
“Every request that the military commanders made to us for equipment was answered. No request was ever turned down,” Mr Brown said. “We had a rising defence budget.”
"The spending review of 2004 was welcomed by the chiefs of our defence staff,” he said. “They were satisfied at the end of the review that they had the resources they needed.”
Gen Guthrie and other military figures said:
“Not fully funding the Army in the way they had asked ... undoubtedly cost the lives of soldiers. He should be asked why he was so unsympathetic towards defence and so sympathetic to other departments.”
“To say Gordon Brown has given the military all they asked for is simply not true,” Lord Guthrie, a former chief of the defence staff, writes in The Daily Telegraph.
“He cannot get away with saying I gave them everything they asked for, that is simply disingenuous.
A senior military figure involved in the 2004 spending talks said Mr Brown’s claims were “nonsense.”
The commander said: “To say it was ‘welcome’ is to use a great deal of poetic licence.
“To say the outcome of that process was ‘welcome’ is frankly hyperbole.”
Major General Patrick Cordingley, a commander in the first Gulf War, said: “The real truth is the Armed Forces are underfunded.”
Who would you believe, Military men who served in our Armed Services with honour, or Gordon Brown?
“Every request that the military commanders made to us for equipment was answered. No request was ever turned down,” Mr Brown said. “We had a rising defence budget.”
"The spending review of 2004 was welcomed by the chiefs of our defence staff,” he said. “They were satisfied at the end of the review that they had the resources they needed.”
Gen Guthrie and other military figures said:
“Not fully funding the Army in the way they had asked ... undoubtedly cost the lives of soldiers. He should be asked why he was so unsympathetic towards defence and so sympathetic to other departments.”
“To say Gordon Brown has given the military all they asked for is simply not true,” Lord Guthrie, a former chief of the defence staff, writes in The Daily Telegraph.
“He cannot get away with saying I gave them everything they asked for, that is simply disingenuous.
A senior military figure involved in the 2004 spending talks said Mr Brown’s claims were “nonsense.”
The commander said: “To say it was ‘welcome’ is to use a great deal of poetic licence.
“To say the outcome of that process was ‘welcome’ is frankly hyperbole.”
Major General Patrick Cordingley, a commander in the first Gulf War, said: “The real truth is the Armed Forces are underfunded.”
Who would you believe, Military men who served in our Armed Services with honour, or Gordon Brown?
Met Office drops seasonal forecast
The Met Office is to stop publishing seasonal forecasts, after receiving criticism over its repeated failures to predict long-term weather prospects.
That is the headline to this article.
An extract from the article;
"Although we can identify general patterns of weather, the science does not exist to allow an exact forecast beyond five days, or to absolutely promise a certain type of weather.
I thought they could predict what will happen over 100 years from now, or am I getting the wrong end of the (hockey) stick?
That is the headline to this article.
An extract from the article;
"Although we can identify general patterns of weather, the science does not exist to allow an exact forecast beyond five days, or to absolutely promise a certain type of weather.
I thought they could predict what will happen over 100 years from now, or am I getting the wrong end of the (hockey) stick?
Friday, 5 March 2010
Climate Change Time Again.
Just read this article.
The headline reads;
New evidence for man-made global warming
Man is responsible for global warming, according to a new report that hits back at the growing scepticism around climate change
An extract from the above article;
The Met Office-led report looked at the latest figures on global temperatures, melting sea ice and humidity. It also considered new evidence on the extent of warming in the Antarctic, rainfall patterns and salinity of the oceans.
It concluded that is was "human influence" that is changing the climate.
The article reminded me of this article a week ago.
The headline reads;
Met Office to look again at global warming records
The Met Office is to re-examine 160 years of global temperature records following the 'climategate' scandal.
An extract from the article;
The project, in partnership with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), will gather the original temperature records from thousands of weather stations around the world. The readings will be double-checked and new information that has become available, such as improved understanding of atmospheric change, will be added. The data will then be independently analysed to assess how the temperature has changed over different regions.
The new analysis, that will take three years, will not only provide a more detailed picture of global warming but boost public confidence in the science of climate change.
Now did the Met Office forget it was looking at all it's data again, or did these scientists not get the memo?
Or did they go through the 150 years of data in a week?
I am still sceptical about global warming. I am very sceptical about CO2 being the main contributor to global warming, but the governments of the world are still going ahead with the carbon credit scheme costing Britain, and other countries, millions if not billions of pounds.
All I want is the truth.
The headline reads;
New evidence for man-made global warming
Man is responsible for global warming, according to a new report that hits back at the growing scepticism around climate change
An extract from the above article;
The Met Office-led report looked at the latest figures on global temperatures, melting sea ice and humidity. It also considered new evidence on the extent of warming in the Antarctic, rainfall patterns and salinity of the oceans.
It concluded that is was "human influence" that is changing the climate.
The article reminded me of this article a week ago.
The headline reads;
Met Office to look again at global warming records
The Met Office is to re-examine 160 years of global temperature records following the 'climategate' scandal.
An extract from the article;
The project, in partnership with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), will gather the original temperature records from thousands of weather stations around the world. The readings will be double-checked and new information that has become available, such as improved understanding of atmospheric change, will be added. The data will then be independently analysed to assess how the temperature has changed over different regions.
The new analysis, that will take three years, will not only provide a more detailed picture of global warming but boost public confidence in the science of climate change.
Now did the Met Office forget it was looking at all it's data again, or did these scientists not get the memo?
Or did they go through the 150 years of data in a week?
I am still sceptical about global warming. I am very sceptical about CO2 being the main contributor to global warming, but the governments of the world are still going ahead with the carbon credit scheme costing Britain, and other countries, millions if not billions of pounds.
All I want is the truth.
Thursday, 4 March 2010
An Article On Education
I have just read this article by Catey Maxx.
The article is called: -
'Positive Policy' - Education: What Labour did wrong & What Tories can do right'
It is about the education system before and after Labour came to power.
If there any teachers out there, do you agree with the article?
Have a read and see what you think.
The article is called: -
'Positive Policy' - Education: What Labour did wrong & What Tories can do right'
It is about the education system before and after Labour came to power.
If there any teachers out there, do you agree with the article?
Have a read and see what you think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)