Monthly Archives: September 2015

Has the tables turned on Cameron


Here is a is a bit of satire worthwhile watching:

For me Billy Bragg sums it up you either like him or loathe him, he does have a point when he said:

A week on from Jeremy Corbyn’s election as Labour leader and it’s striking how not a single national newspaper has come out to support him. The usual suspects have gone for his throat, but even the left of centre Guardian and Observer have filled their pages with articles repeating the received wisdom that he cannot win an election. The Tories victory in May seems to have convinced the media that the British electorate will only vote for centre-right candidates.

jghjngyrThis complacent assumption led the Labour Party to open their leadership election to party supporters. When Ed Miliband won in 2010 with the support of the unions, the Blairites in the Labour high command moved swiftly to ensure that this could never happen again. To dilute the left-wing power of the unions, the party opened the process to anyone willing to pay £3, because everyone knows that Labour supporters are more moderate than union members and will happily vote for a centrist candidate. For the Blairites, this was a terrible miscalculation.

All through the leadership campaign and since Corbyn’s election, New Labour’s big guns have been telling us that he is simply unelectable, that Labour cannot win from the left. They cite Ed Miliband’s defeat as proof of their argument. But did the Tories actually win because Labour was too left-wing?

The distorting effect of our first past the post electoral system handed the Tories an accidental majority. A party needs 326 seats for an overall majority in the Commons and the Conservatives won 331. Had just 429 Conservative voters in five marginal constituencies opted to put a cross against the name of the Tories’ main rival instead, then David Cameron would not have won a majority.jdfbfuj

Of course, this doesn’t mean that Ed Miliband would now be in No.10 had those votes gone the other way. We’d more likely be saddled with another Tory/LibDem coalition, because it was the collapse of the Liberal Democrat vote that handed the election to the Tories. In south west England, the perception of the LibDems as a left wing alternative to the Tories helped them to win 15 seats in 2010. When they then chose to put the Tories into power by joining the coalition, voters in the south west deserted them and they lost all 15 seats.

The Tories didn’t win a majority because Labour were seen as moving to the left, they won because the LibDems moved to the right and were heavily punished by their voters for doing so.

Cameron’s outright victory was an anomaly, brought about by a first past the post system unable to cope with more than three parties vying for power. It has allowed the Tories and their allies in the media to act as if the whole country is behind them and their austerity agenda, whereas the real picture is much more ambiguous.

We are in the midst of a process of great change sparked by the Crash of 2008, the ramifications of which may rumble on beyond the 2020 election. The British people no longer fully trust the political class to rule in the best interests of the majority of voters who put them into government. Furthermore, globalisation has left many feeling that they no longer have any control over their lives.jhbnfgj

Those who make a living diagnosing the ailments of our body politic seem baffled by the symptoms that keep flaring up. The huge turn out in the Scottish referendum; the rise of UKIP to become the third largest party in terms of votes; the almost complete wipe out of the unionist parties in Scotland by the SNP; the landslide victory of Jeremy Corbyn: all these suggest that if you give people something to vote for, something that offers genuinely transformative change, they will come out and grab it with both hands.

Will our political class wake up and smell the coffee, realising that people want something more than just the narrow political dialogue that they have determinedly stuck to over the past twenty years? Or will they sleep walk into the EU referendum with the same complacent attitude towards the ‘moderate’ British electorate? To do so could be their greatest miscalculation yet.

Thought I get the second bit of satire would get this one in.

Order, order, order question to the Prime Minister (PMQs):

1: Do you realise that you are the laughing stock of the week can you explain and why. Comments welcome. Oink oink?

2: What you know about Lord Ashcroft tax havens and what will you do to crawl back the UK taxes?gedtik

Frankly, the amount of negative press reports over the leader of Labour Party is reaching boiling point. It’s only been a week since he is in the post let the voters decide who they want as the next Prime Minister.

The press and media are becoming a very scratch record beyond redemption.

This also reminds me about five years ago when we were choosing a new leader in the party when Gordon Brown decided to step down the same thing happened. The same happened to Ed Miliband with the negative press over bacon butty.

When will people get it the Tory rags are only interested in getting the Conservatives re-elected and selling their propaganda. Granted there is a saying “A week in politics is a long time”. The press, social media and the general public wants to have an understanding of where is he coming from and will he be fit to be the next prime minister to lead our great nation. In truth it’s early days and I suspect that comrade Corbyn has just realised that he is in the deep end of cut throat politics by embracing a broad church shadow cabinet and using his wit to take on the press to answer difficult questions from them.

Only this week we all had a taste of how Jeremy Corbyn will hold up during Prime Minister Questions Time (PMQs). As usual the Prime Minister of the day will give all the pleasantries to our newly elected leader. The next PMQs no doubt Jeremy Corbyn will have to up his game and be more eloquent and firm with the questions he puts to David Cameron then go on the attack. Granted the prime minister questions time had a different format and this allowed David Cameron to get in some spin doctors message.

Then the usual suspect press are alleging that certain Senior Labour MPs putting the knife in the back of Jeremy Corbyn and already the knife is out for them in a form of petition for them to be deselected by their Constituency Labour Party (CLP). Then surely it’s up to the CLP to decide or the parliamentary Labour Party to decide what action to take against those responsible for alleging to be putting the party in disrepute.

Thought I bit of satire would get this one in.

Order, order, order question to the Prime Minister (PMQs):

1: Do you realise that you are the laughing stock of the week can you explain and why. Comments welcome. Oink oink?

2: What you know about Lord Ashcroft tax havens and what will you do to crawl back the UK taxes?

Frankly, the amount of negative press reports over the leader of Labour Party is reaching boiling point. It’s only been a week since he is in the post let the voters decide who they want as the next Prime Minister.

The press and media are becoming a very scratch record beyond redemption.

This also reminds me about five years ago when we were choosing a new leader in the party when Gordon Brown decided to step down the same thing happened. The same happened to Ed Miliband with the negative press over bacon butty.

When will people get it the Tory rags are only interested in getting the Conservatives re-elected and selling their propaganda. Granted there is a saying “A week in politics is a long time”. The press, social media and the general public wants to have an understanding of where is he coming from and will he be fit to be the next prime minister to lead our great nation. In truth it’s early days and I suspect that comrade Corbyn has just realised that he is in the deep end of cut throat politics by embracing a broad church shadow cabinet and using his wit to take on the press to answer difficult questions from them.

Only this week we all had a taste of how Jeremy Corbyn will hold up during Prime Minister Questions Time (PMQs). As usual the Prime Minister of the day will give all the pleasantries to our newly elected leader. The next PMQs no doubt Jeremy Corbyn will have to up his game and be more eloquent and firm with the questions he puts to David Cameron then go on the attack. Granted the prime minister questions time had a different format and this allowed David Cameron to get in some spin doctors message.

Then the usual suspect press are alleging that certain Senior Labour MPs putting the knife in the back of Jeremy Corbyn and already the knife is out for them in a form of petition for them to be deselected by their Constituency Labour Party (CLP). Then surely it’s up to the CLP to decide or the parliamentary Labour Party to decide what action to take against those responsible for alleging to be putting the party in disrepute.

I’m more concerned in what will be in a Labour manifesto such as:

Youth services which includes employment to recruit young people to gain full employment.

Proper funding of our public services and for services at the point of need like our NHS, and Libraries and education

How to grow on the economy and attracting people back into employment, building more social housing, regeneration of cities, town centres, and involving small businesses.

Immigration, social chapter, national security, foreign affairs, taxation, human rights, schools, Europe, mental health, physical disabilities, family friendly policies, welfare, devolution, Living Wage, National Min Wage, pensions, police crime commissioners, HS2, localism, transportation, social justice, local government and fox hunting to name a few and it should be decided at national conference before it goes into our manifesto.

I make no apologies for saying that vote for Jeremy Corbyn was my third choice. I stand united by the leadership. If anything Jeremy Corbyn has stimulated debate in our party and lots of people have join the party which is a good. Let’s not forget that Jeremy Corbyn got more votes than Tony Blair and Ed Miliband in the leadership contest.

 

More Negative spin on Jeremy Corbyn Newly elected Leader


jhefThere is much speculation from the media in regards to Jeremy Corbyn with their negative reporting but in truth its early days for the new leader to shine as the newly elected leader of the Labour Party and how he will lead us to victory leading up to the local and general elections which many of the voters wants to know before they give their trust back to Labour.

It’s good to know that one man has inspired so many new activists back into the party to reclaim the party to revisit its roots inwards. The main concerns are the policies will they be able to persuade the voters to return to get a Labour victory.

It’s no surprise that Conservatives are on the defensive already which they had planned should Jeremy Corbyn became leader coupled by the reporting of alleged ten shadow ministers resigning to return to the life of backbench. The truth is we will never really comprehend the reasons why they took the decisions. One reason could be that they had spent some time on the front bench and felt that they need to recuperate and recharge their battery to fight another day and there is a place for new talent to put their name into the hat to come forward.

hdbfhtgklfThis is definite intriguing times ahead whilst the TUC conference begins no doubt lots of praises to the new leader and there are a number of important bills that lay before parliament such as the Trade Union Bill, the third reading of Welfare Reform bill, Tax Credits, Syria, European Union, English Referendum, Economy, immigration, and Small Businesses to name a few that comes to mind. I’m almost sure that this establishment will try to force through various statements for the use of another drone strikes on Syria and they would use the argument of National Security based on our intelligence service. The new leader must ensure that the chief whip enforce a three way whip in place to our Labour MPs. Some will argue this will not help but hinder. If it hinders then I would kindly remind our Labour MPs that it’s us the members of the party that select their candidature for the Joe Public to vote them into office.

On the face of the new shadow cabinet it seems to be good at the surface but only time will tell how the new shadow cabinet will do and how effectively that they do their jobs that they been given to do. One thing is for sure there is an appetite for change and don’t forget that we have lost two general elections and people want to see a change of direction of Labour Party. I do concur that changes is needed and there are many of the party who are wondering if we have the right person to lead us to victory. I say only time will tell and the fact that the leader got 59.9 per cent of the vote from the membership to me mean little to same ordinary Job blog and who is only wants to know where their next meal is coming from if they vote labour in all the elections.

Intriguingly the list of shadow ministers that has been introduced questions remains what experience do they have on the front bench other than

 

  • Shadow chancellor – John McDonnell
  • Shadow foreign secretary – Hilary Benn
  • Shadow home secretary – Andy Burnham
  • Shadow business secretary – Angela Eagle
  • Shadow health secretary – Heidi Alexander
  • Shadow justice secretary – Lord Falconer
  • Shadow education secretary – Lucy Powell
  • Shadow international development secretary – Diane Abbott
  • Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury – Seema Malhotra
  • Chief whip – Rosie Winterton

I will continue urge members to hold their to ground and hold the leadership to account. remember without the members there will not be a party.

 

Further Privatization of our public services Onwards


hhnfI would like to make it clear that I will take no lesions from a Conservative Government with their constant blame game of Labour Party whilst they are in power. If people thought it was bad enough having a Labour Government then I have to say that Labour did more good than a Coalition or a Conservative Government put together as evidence will show that Labour invested more into our public services than the present establishment. Conservatives have a vested interest by introducing the U.S. Style of privatisation of public services (NHS and Prison Service)

It’s no surprise that our services are the hardest hit with cuts in both Central and Local governments to make way for privatisation by contracting out to the private sector in return for them to cherry pick the best services for a quick buck. I can just hear people reading this article saying “here we go we’ve got another lefty nutter who goes not believe in progress and capitalism”. Well if it means to selling off our public services to the highest bidder than I’m a very proud to be branded a communist, proud to be born in our NHS, and proud to be a son of immigrants.

jfjmngI can see this so called establishment will introducing legislation to make it compulsory to buy private health insurance for the use of our beloved NHS which both UKIP and BNP will be jumping for joy. Our NHS was introduced by a Labour a Government after the Second World War free at the point of need. This government then has a cheek to say that “they are the party for the working people”. Like hell they are, they are hiding the fact that they are the party for the fatcats and billionaires. In other words as the American dollar bill says in god we trust which is the code word for saying in the name of the almighty dollar we trust.

Some will argue it was Labour Government that started the part privatisation during their time in office. This may be a half-baked truth in it. In actual fact it was under Thatcher and Major Governments that started the process by privatising our public services in the first place by closing down some hospitals for Learning disabilities and Mental Health this came about when Care In The Community came into force which opened the floodgates to the third sectors and private sectors who thought that they would make a killing on our health services and social services.

Oh have I forgotten about Private Finance Initiative(PFI) which was introduce by the Conservatives just before the last days in government they started the attack on the Cleaning, and catering Departments in the hospitals. by contracting out the services.jfngh

Let’s not forget our railways, water, electricity, gas, transport, and coal mining was once in public ownership now in the private sector compliments of the Conservatives between 1970s – 1980s. Can someone remind me which government introduced the right to buy council house. I wonder was it a Conservative Government and they failed to mention that they failed to build more council housing, so who was short memories now.

If voters want to throw rotten tomatoes and cabbages then throw them at the Conservatives for attacking our NHS in the first instance. It’s no wonder why doctors and nurses are leaving the NHS for better pay to apply their skills to other parts of the continent such as Austria or they open up their own private consultant services and reapply for jobs in our NHS as consultants with specialised skills that our NHS badly needed coupled by using nursing agencies and recruiting foreign nurses to fill post which not enough trained nurses are not forthcoming as this government has cut the nursing and doctors budget dramatically.

jkfgngWhilst most people will recognise that changes are needed and challenge to implement in order to save our NHS what most want a service will continue to argue that our service should be continued to be free at the point of need. And those who can afford to pay they should pay more to use our NHS.

The very cheek of  David Cameron to say child protection services are facing privatisation to “reform” public services and “streamline” government.

Speaking in Leeds yesterday, the Prime Minister claimed children’s services were an example of “state failure” that demanded “more ambitious reform.”

And, in a move that mirrors Tory schools policy, he threatened to strip local authorities of responsibility for social services and hand them over to not-for-profit trusts.

kjkfMr Cameron said it was part of his vision for a “smarter state,” where the government would “spend less and deliver more.”

“It’s not unlike business,” he said. “Businesses are constantly adapting and changing, using new technology or new methods of delivery to improve both their products and reduce their costs.

“I’m not suggesting we should run government exactly like a business. I just mean that if we use their insights, we can help develop a smarter state.”

Campaign for Public Ownership director Neil Clark said the prospect of “wholescale outsourcing and privatisation” lurked behind the Prime Minister’s reform rhetoric.

“The extremist agenda of Cameron and his government is very obvious it’s to destroy the last vestiges of the progressive post-World War II mixed economy.

“When he talks about a ‘smarter state,’ he means a state that can still afford to bomb Syria, but one which won’t provide libraries, social care and other important public services.”

Mr Cameron also asserted that he had a “moral imperative” to “streamline” government.jdvjsdv

The sale of public assets that are “no longer needed” is to be fast tracked, while public land will be flogged off with planning permission to make it more attractive to big-money buyers.

Power over fire services will also be handed over to police and crime commissioners.

Fire Brigades Union general secretary Matt Wrack said: “These are badly thought-out proposals from a government which couldn’t care less about emergency services or those they employ.

“Police are law enforcers, while fire and rescue is a humanitarian service with a very different remit and culture. Firefighters need to be seen to be neutral within the communities they serve.”

There is no doubt in my mind that this government is also set to introduce laws that will compel the police, fire and ambulance services to combine “back office functions.”

Having said all of this, now the question what will be Labour Party position on this will it is more of the same or will there be a change in direction as we all know that Labour has suffered two defeats from general elections 2010-2015.
jhnfgjhnh
Labour needs to take a very hard look inwards and start to gain its grounds to identify what the party stands for and stop appetising to all. Now is the time to stop crying over spilled milk. Now is the time for our new leader and members of the party to unite and have a fundamental rethink on what lays ahead and be more consistent with the message that they are promoting and identity themselves differently from the Conservatives in the next local elections in 2016 on wards.

Public Services stretched to the limit


First disappointment:

When this establishment gets it public services right we should praise our public services, when the service goes wrong we should inform the management so they can put it right. Recently I had to attend an appointment with a relative which was arranged by a multi-agency  organisation this was the second time that we had to use them. On this occasion we were not happy with the service that they provided firstly the transportation reach two hours late which made matters worse then when we got to the X-ray department only to be informed that they postponed all X-rays and they will be in touch.pub

Second disappointment:

On the way back from our disappointed appointment we had to make a stop to the post office in the town centre as this was the nearest one to us, we decided to join the queue to be serviced finally we thought as we stood near the front only for an announcement that they cannot serve anybody as the counter staff are due to go on their training and they are closing down for the evening.

Third disappointment:

Went to doctors’ surgery surprisingly to have a multiple of things like to give a blood, and urine samples and a refill prescription for my service user medication to only learn that they are closed for three days. All of this could have been avoided if the staff would have informed us beforehand so that the travel arrangement could be been put off for another time.

Some people will say that we should not criticise our public services as they are over worked and underpaid. I would concur with some of the sentiment to an extent. The other side of the coin is we all use our beloved public services as customers and without customers there will not be public services. Although there has been some improvement however more can be done to improve the way how the conservative establishment invest in our services instead of tendering our services to the highest bidder only for them to cream of the best services back into the hands of private profiteers. For this I blame both previous and present governments as they could have solved these issues ages ago but instead to continue to pay lip services.jchang

Local Government has faced one of the biggest cuts in recorded history seconded by Police, NHS, Defence, Housing, Welfare schools, and Highways to name a few. Somehow I can see much worst to arrive there has been signs in place like the jaws of doom both in Local and Central government as the cuts are being implemented heavy handily and in return public services are expected to produce more for less in all their services whilst the staff moral are down by the insult of the establishment offering public sector workers a 1 per cent increase in their salaries of whilst Members of Parliament are offered a 11 per cent pay raise.

How will the current government fund our public services with the increase in services that they have provide to the recent announcement of 20,000 refugees which is due to arrive coming months. Whilst I whole heartedly concur with the European Convention on refugees and asylum seekers I can’t help feeling that the likes of far right groups and UKIP will exploit this to their own gains by arguing that we should look after our own people first.

Ban Ki Moon is correct to say that the UN security council is failing Syria because of big power divisions which have prevented action to end a conflict that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and driven the biggest refugee exodus in a generation.

He further criticised Russia and China should “look beyond national interest” and stop blocking security council action on the conflict in Syria as the flow of refugees to Europe reaches unprecedented levels.

dc“We need some solidarity, unity of purpose, particularly among the permanent members of the security council,” he said in an interview. “When they are divided, it is extremely difficult for the United Nations to deliver. That’s why I’ve been urging the members of the security council to look beyond national interest. We have to look for the global interest.

“When the security council members are united we have seen very speedy and tremendous impact in addressing the issues, as we have seen in the case of chemical weapon investigation in Syria”.

Although he did not mention Russia and china by name the two countries have on several occasions blocked resolutions critical of the Syrian government, threatening sanctions or pressing it towards a negotiated settlement. Last year, Moscow and Beijing also vetoed a move backed by the 13 other permanent and non-permament members of the security council to refer the Syrian conflict for investigation by the international criminal court.

Ban had backed the referral to the ICC, saying the Syrian people “have a fundamental right to justice”.

He has previously spoken of his “shame” and “anger” at the international community’s “impotence to stop the war” in Syria, and said the UN’s credibility had suffered as a result.

There are various estimates for the death toll in Syria, extending up to more than 300,000, while about half the pre-war population of 22 million has been uprooted.

kdghgThe UN high commissioner for refugees has described the exodus of people fleeing the fighting as the largest refugee crisis in a generation. About 4 million people have crossed into neighbouring countries with almost half of those going to Turkey. Tens of thousands have made the difficult and often dangerous journey to Europe.

The UNHCR said nearly 350,000 Syrians had applied for political asylum in Europe since the war began. In August, the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, said he was confident Russia would continue to back his regime.

“We have strong confidence in the Russians, as they have proven throughout this crisis, for four years, that they are sincere and transparent in their relationship with us,” he said in an interview with Hezbollah’s al –Manar television network. ssad described Russia as “principled”, while “the United States abandons its allies, abandons its friends”.

Last month, Barack Obama called on Russia and Syria’s principal regional ally, Iran, to “recognise that the trend lines are not good for Assad”.

Ban acknowledged that growing demands within the UN for the security council to be reformed. “A lot of interesting ideas have been proposed by the member states and there is widespread feeling and opinion among member states that considering such dramatic changes in political and security field in the world, the security council should change also, in a more democratic way, transparent and accountable way,” he said.

uiefhkWhile there is frustration that international action to try to end Syria’s deepening humanitarian crisis is being blocked by Moscow and Beijing, criticism of the permanent members’ use of the veto for narrow political interest is longstanding. The US has used its veto to protect Israel from criticism more times than the total number of vetoes cast by the other permanent members combined.

The expectation from this government falls short of what Yvette Cooper MP and David Miliband proposed of 24,000 this is a fall by 4000. Granted there is a strong case for the argument to take in its fair share of the refugees from war torn countries. They need help now and European establishment needs to work together now, not tomorrow. It’s no wonder that that European nations are in turmoil as each country are passing the buck and blaming each other instead of abiding by the European Conversation when both asylum seekers and refugees arrives to registering them from the country that they first landed in Europe so that they can receive support instead the establishment is more concerned about their own greed by selling weapons of mass destruction to the Middle East in return for black gold.

jjdIt’s very noble of David Cameron to say that UK had a moral responsibility to those living in camps bordering Syria while doing all it can to end the conflict there. Vulnerable children and orphans would be prioritised what will be a national effort. I wonder like many others were it because of people’s power where they started to take to social media and government petition that caused the change of heart.

Well here is the hidden agenda it turns out that the Tories wants to deport the refugees when their 18, so much for the big announcement in the house. This also happened under a previous Labour government when some Afghanistan and Iraqis came to the UK.

This is got to be a first by using aid money to support councils to take in refugees this nothing more than pandering to the likes of far right groups, BNP and UKIP as they want out of European Union.

The increase of right-wing xenophobes are bound to make hay out of the latest migration figures, which indicate net immigration to Britain is at an all-time high.

They are bound to conflate the numbers issued by the Office for National Statistics with the desperate scenes that have dominated our television screens this summer, of refugees crowded into rickety boats or forced to set up rudimentary camp in the concrete Jungle at Calais.

Actually the figures tell a different story. The “net migration” measure of 330,000 is the difference between the number of people entering this country and the number leaving.TUC_Oct4_emailFooter_1

Yes, it’s a new record, so it’s higher than it ever was under Labour, and yes, it makes a mockery of David Cameron’s “no ifs, no buts” brag that he would cut immigration to below 100,000.

The Prime Minister was talking nonsense, since he knew at the time and knows now that EU law prevents member states from limiting migration within the bloc. And 269,000 of the 330,000 — 85 per cent — are EU citizens.

They are coming here legitimately and legally, many are doing essential work in our public services, they pay more in tax than they receive in social security payments. Indeed, the same is true of immigrants from outside the EU, as demonstrated in repeated studies.

Immigration is not then an economic problem. Social dumping is where, bolstered by rulings in the ill-named European Court of Justice, ruthless employers hire foreign workers at below the going rate to drive wages down.

The correct response in industries where this is common, such as construction and agriculture, has already been flagged up by unions working in the sectors extend the remit of the Gangmasters Licensing Authority to prevent rogue employers from operating, ensure all workers are organised and restore collective bargaining rights.

This Conservative government’s bid to outlaw most industrial action and hobble trade unions is what will drive wages down. It’s the Tories and not the migrants we need to see off.

At the same time, any bid to confuse this issue with that of the refugees fleeing Africa and the Middle East should be given short shrift.

Britain is not a “soft touch” for people seeking to escape genocide and war — quite the opposite.

The vast majority of those fleeing the butchery in Syria, for example, have taken refuge in neighbouring countries.

Out of an estimated four million Syrians who have been forced to leave their country, 3.5 million are in Turkey, Lebanon or Jordan.

Even of the tiny proportion who have sought refuge in Europe, Britain has offered shelter to less than 1 per cent compared to 40 per cent who have been taken in by Germany and 20 per cent by Sweden.

David Cameron and Theresa May show total indifference to the desperation of the destitute, shutting them out with razor-wire fences and sniffer dogs.

This is rendered even more shameful by the instrumental role Britain has played in creating the refugee crisis in the first place.

Iraq we invaded, Libya we bombed, Syria we merely helped fill with gun-toting religious extremists by funding and arming groups we hoped would overthrow the Assad regime.

Some of those “radicalised” killers come from Britain itself, as our security services are so keen to remind us when it gives them an opportunity to spy on our emails or tap our phones.

Tory ministers are not just too hard-hearted to help those in need. They are too hypocritical to take some responsibility for the mayhem they have caused.

After all this taking place with a conservative government I still love our public service and I would urge all to make your way to this years Conservative Conference with your banners and invite all your friend with you say

 

 

 

Who is responsible for EU Crisis on refugees?


refugees3I don’t normally give credit where it’s due to Chancellor Angela Merkel she is correct to say:

Europe as a whole needs to move on how to deal with refugees and migrants arriving in EU.

If Europe fails on the question of refugees, then it won’t be the Europe we wished for.

Somehow I have to admit whilst I may concur with Angela Merkel there is something deep down inside me that also says don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the current situation.

I would kindly remind all the world establishment to read on the European Convention on Refugees for those who is not aware of it or chosose to ignore it they are just as guilty of committing a crime against humanity:

http://www.ecre.org/refugees/refugees/refugees-in-the-eu.html

If one goes back into the centuries of migration it was the Europeans explorers that started the problems with the great blessings of their kings and queens by invading foreign countries looting for gold and richness to return to their country of origin in glory during the fourteen century.mg

Oh here we go again, we are not responsible for what our forefathers did do I hear people shouting in some quarters. Well it seems like mud sticks unfortunately. The other-side of the coin is it’s the Europeans who created the problem in the first place and without migration the economy of our nation would not have survived. I say thanks to our nation that we have equality of opportunity, diversity, and multiculturalism today from immigrants who helped to build our country with a variety of languages, skills, entertainment, and foods.

refugees1Let’s not forget it’s was our colonial masters who had to recruit soldiers and merchant sailors from Chinese, Indian, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhist, Caribbean, Welsh, Scottish, and Irish backgrounds to help to defeat the fascists in both World Wars that brought in the richness that we witnessed today which the racist and fascist refuse to acknowledge as they are the first ones to say by having all those foreigners it’s a drain to public services and how conveniently they seem to forget or refuse to acknowledge. Oh what a laugh that racist and fascist enjoy the fine food of the world on their doorstep with a pint or wine.

The British establishment (Conservatives) are very quick to pander to UKIP, and BNP voters by introducing British Values and they are no position to explain what are the values. When someone tries to look up what are British values there is no definition at the current time. However there is lots of information about Britishness. I would ask our politicians what are British values.

Checkout this you will be surprised:

It was not long ago that European leaders have agreed to resettle 40,000 refugees currently in Italy and Greece to other EU countries over the next two years.

EU president Donald Tusk said the agreement was reached after an overnight summit to show “solidarity with front-line countries.”

IMG_2230The EU will also resettle 20,000 refugees, mostly from Syria and Iraq, currently in camps outside the EU.

But the agreements only cover a fraction of the total number of refugees arriving.

More than 114,000 have been rescued from overloaded boats operated by unscrupulous people-traffickers in the Mediterranean so far this year, and 2,600 have died or gone missing during the voyage.

“It is, to tell the disturbing truth, a very modest effort,” admitted European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker.

Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel said: “There is a lack of ambition, a lack of will. It wasn’t a sense of solidarity that dominated around that table.”

Here is something else that EU leaders have very short memories that  European Union negotiations on a quota allocation system for refugees were in jeopardy yesterday after some nations rejected the scheme.

Hungary, Slovakia and Estonia were among those objecting to the proposal to share the responsibility of settling refugees among the 28 EU member states. The plan requires unanimous agreement.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, of the conservative Fidesz party, raged: “It is a crazy idea for someone to let refugees into their own country, not defends their borders, and then says: ‘Now I will distribute them among you, who did not want to let anyone in’,” he said.

Slovakia’s Interior Ministry said that it “currently refuses binding quotas on migrants,” while Estonia said it prefers voluntary relocation and resettlement for refugees.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel acknowledged that it would be “hard work” to put a quota system in place but said there was “a large group of countries” in favour.

I have to concur with David Miliband when he called on the British government to take in its fair share of refugees fleeing the war in Syria and other conflicts, and said continued failure to do so would represent an abandonment of the UK’s legal and humanitarian traditions.

refugees2The former foreign secretary, who now heads the International Rescue Committee (IRC) aid agency, has been quoted that the strict limits Britain has placed on the acceptance of refugees represented a double standard that would ultimately undermine Britain’s influence abroad.

“When I hear people say we’ve got to firm up our borders, it makes me think of the message we’re sending to Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq, which is to keep their borders open for Syrians,” Miliband said in an interview in New York.

“People in Britain have got to understand that these countries notice the difference between what we’re saying and what we’re doing.”

The UK granted asylum to roughly 10, 000 refugees last year, significantly fewer than most other wealthy western European countries. On a per capita basis, Britain’s record is one of the meanest on the continent. Miliband, who was Labour’s foreign secretary from 2007 to 2010, said that performance represented a turning away from the country’s more welcoming past.

“Britain was at the forefront of writing the conventions and writing the protocols that established legal rights for refugees. A lot of the legal theory came out of the UK,” he said. “The reasons we did so were good in the the 40s and 50s and they are good today. What applied to Europeans then should apply to Africans and Asians today. We cannot say UN conventions apply to one group of people and not to others.”

The IRC is helping to meet the immediate humanitarian needs of the thousands of desperate refugees arriving daily on the Greek island of Lesbo An estimated 4,000 arrived on Saturday alone. According to the agency, with 80% fleeing war in Syria and 14% escaping chronic conflict in Afghanistan.

The language used by British government, and much of the UK media, to describe the crisis, referring to migrants rather than refugees (although the majority arriving on Europe’s shores are fleeing war or persecution), reflected a conscious effort to deny them their rights enshrined by international convention.

“It is a misnamed crisis, and it seems not misnamed by accident. It’s been too convenient to misname it as a migrant crisis, because it suggests these people are voluntarily fleeing, whereas in fact if you’ve been barrel-bombed out of your home three times, life and limb demand that you flee,” he said. “It’s not about being politically incorrect in using the term migrant. It’s simply incorrect.”

Germany, France and the UK have called for a meeting of EU interior and justice ministers in mid-September to work out new responses to the crisis. The US has said it would open its doors to more Syrian refugees, having taken in less than a thousand so far, but its plan is to take in only 8,000 by the end of next year.

“There needs to be some burden-sharing bigger countries taking more people than smaller countries, richer countries taking more people than poorer countries. Historically the US has taken about 50% of the world’s resettled refugees. It would certainly help the European debate if the Americans were seen to be stepping up.”

And I have to say that I personally don’t think that David Cameron’s current establishment really gives two monkeys about the refugee crisis this is on the grounds of that he is too busy pandering to
the UKIP and BNP voters. I have more respect for Yvette Cooper who also sums it up in a nutshell for me. See article below:

http://www.yvetteforlabour.co.uk/speech_the_european_refugee_crisis