Long term policies no longer exist from all the main political parties

Checkout this Youtube then make up your mind:

Its alleged 2009 audit debt equal 510 percent of GDP accumulated through bad management of the economy by politicians too scared to face the truth. Then there is the issue of Price Rises Under Tories Gas 45% Stamp 56% Water 20% RailFares 27% BusFare 22% Electric 39% Rent £1100/15% Food 19%

Long term policies no longer exist. The under 35s will have to pay for the disasters of PFI a hand to mouth state pension close to collapse and massive debts incurred by both present and previous governments. The generation muddling through this mess will be the least well equipped for that work of any in centuries.

Detailed closely argued and lucid Howker and Malik’s analysis of UK is very worrying as can be and the figures shock.  At a time of austerity when both low and middle incomes are struggling to put rice and cabbage on the table to feed their children and cloth them, pay their mortgage or rent(s) then they come across headlines like Bank has room to raise UK rates which has a knock on affect which plays into the hands of payday loan and loan sharks encouraged to borrow from them at rates which they cannot afford to pay back.

Whilst all this taking place with the coalition I have been consistent to inform my readers we continue to witness high levels of poverty from all quarters such as small businesses have to chase up other companies to pay up to only learn that they have gone into administration and they can’t pay their workers.

So far we all have read the announcements from three of the six energy companies of price rises in both electricity and gas on top of what they have to pay. Nor have we not forgotten train and bus fares have increased whilst this coalition sits on their bums and rub their hands all the way to their fatcat friends to say ” Oh great one look at we have done for the rich frack the low and middle incomes so continue to give us your large donations and forget about UKIP”

UK Government debt always highest under the Tories don’t take my word for it, read the Tory supporting Spectator who (correctly) point out that under the Coalition of slathers and strippers will have borrowed more in 5 years than Labour did in 13 years #sameoldtories

Blind Tory Ideology, Bedroom Tax, Benefits Cap, Youth Employment scheme – none work and none have saved money but are driven by blind ideology and desire to stigmatise poor but they have no problems with tax dodgers and spivs like Jim Radcliffe the tax exile owner of #Grangemouth Refinery. Lynton Crosby‘s dog whistles are all over PR Dave’s “performance” today- they have had to import an immigrant to put the Nasty back into Nasty Party? Great PMQ for Labour – yesterday John Major tried to rescue the Tories from their political incompetence but the Bullingdon Boys were too far up to notice? #PMQ #sameoldtories

We are seeing the return of absolute levels of poverty which have not existed on this scale since the Victorian age over a century ago. Relative poverty is when people can’t afford the comforts and enjoyments which most people have, but absolute poverty is when people haven’t the money to pay for even their most basic needs.

The evidence is all around us. There are now over 300 foodbanks in Britain, and the number is rising every week.

The Red Cross is setting up centres to help the destitute, just as they do in developing countries.

A new study published this week shows that even in prosperous areas of the country such as London more than a quarter of the population are now living in poverty.

And a new scary fact is steadily emerging – an increasing number of these poverty households are not dependent on benefits but have people in work.

In northern England the first of the Northern Housing Consortium’s surveys, just published, presents a devastating picture.

It is based on 74 households, a small sample but one which broadly reflects all households living in the social rented sector.

It reveals that after paying for rent, food and other essential bills, two-thirds end up with less than £10 left each week while more than a third end up with nothing left at all.

A quarter can only afford £20 or less on food per week. How many of the rest of us could survive on that?

Four-fifths of them are in debt, and not small levels of debt either – it averages nearly £2,500.

Some of the responses to the survey are heart-rending.

Take this one. “Hate the system. I have worked all my life and because work is so hard to find, I have been taking anything. I had a phone call one night and was offered three days work starting the next day.

“I did it, then went to the jobcentre to tell them I had earned three days money. They fined me for not telling them sooner, but I couldn’t as I’d had to start at 7.30am the next morning.

“Then I put a new claim in, then got another three days work. This has been on and off for months. I hate not working and will take what I can, but now this has messed all my benefits up and I’m getting fined.

“They stop my money and I have to sell things to pay bedroom tax and council tax. I am going to have nothing left at this rate. How can this be right when all I am trying to do is find a job?”

What makes this so gratuitously cruel for the victims is that it isn’t even necessary.

The pain is enforced, but the budget deficit is not being reduced.

The right way to cut the deficit is by public investment to stimulate the economy, cut the dole queues – it now costs £18 billion a year to keep the current 2.5 million unemployed out of work – and kick-start growth to turn the economy around, which the present fragile so-called “recovery” is certainly not doing.

Then, and only then, will the bitter scourge of absolute poverty be removed from this land. British Gas has joined SSE at the energy suppliers’ trough, imposing rises of 10.4 and 8.4 per cent for electricity and gas, but consumers must not despair because David Cameron is on the case.

Keen on reinforcing his reputation as upper class twit of the year Cameron suggests that unhappy consumers could switch suppliers for the best deal.

Why did no-one ever think of this before and advise us to undermine energy privateers’ efforts to impoverish us all by shopping around?

For the simple reason that SSE, British Gas, and Npower are just the first of the big six suppliers to announce their annual ransom demands. The other three won’t be long in following suit and, since the six dominate 99 per cent of the market, there is no escape.

Households need electricity and gas, so everyone is over a barrel, held hostage by a greedy oligopoly.

Only someone seriously hard of thinking would imagine that forensic investigation of a rigged market to get the best deal could throw up a viable alternative to extortion by private suppliers.

If Cameron really believed this, his family would be justified in demanding a refund from Eton in compensation for a wasted private education.

Of course he doesn’t. The Prime Minister, like all politicians who back privatisation, does so in the full knowledge that it is a tried and tested means of enriching the rich by further impoverishing the poor.

When he calls the British Gas rise “disappointing,” he is voicing his fear that voters might view him as somehow to blame for no other reason than he claims to run the country.

The electorate might look around other major parties to see if anyone is prepared to do anything about this daylight robbery.

Could it be Ed Miliband, who talks the talk, accusing Cameron of “standing up for the energy companies not the consumer” and of these firms “overcharging people in a market that’s not working and has broken?”

Unfortunately, the Labour leader won’t budge beyond his promise of a temporary tariff freeze before allowing the oligopoly to return to its old tricks. Gas and electricity used to be owned by all of us. Now it belongs to tiny wealthy elite who have bought the right to print money.

It is a symbol of division in society between those who set their own incomes through domination of the economy and those who scrabble around trying to make ends meet.

These are the people highlighted by Alan Milburn, who moved seamlessly from new Labour minister to the board of Pepsi Cola and then coalition hireling as the preposterously named “social mobility tsar.”

Alan Milburn, who had a previous honourable existence as a grassroots labour movement campaigner in Newcastle, is right to point out that work is no longer a cure for poverty because wage levels are too low.

But his targeting of pensioners’ winter fuel allowance and free TV licences to supposedly bridge Britain’s “fairness deficit” is way off the mark.

Setting better-off pensioners against hard-pressed younger families with children to overcome a supposed “intergenerational injustice” is irrelevant to the real division within society – class.

As long as the labour movement’s political representatives refuse to consider taking key areas of the economy, including the privatised utilities, into pubic ownership, working people will continue to be treated as poorly paid pawns by the ruling class.

On yer bike scroungers and get a job

I’m sure many have come across press and social media which would make your blood boil recently and no it’s not about the headlines of Ed Miliband’s father but more of the negatives of people who lives a life on benefits.

Some of the cases which highlight concerns of a parent with 11 children who will not get out of bed unless she receives a job for the sum of £60,000 per annum. It’s no wonder why this will get everybody’s back up. In the documentation the interviewees is right to quote that there is no law set out on how many children to have unless you live in China with their one child policy.

It’s little wonder why in certain quarters there are many that are angered which makes it hard for people who had lost their jobs recently through no fault of their own owing to world recession to depend on the dole and they have to depend on housing, council, and child benefits to top it up they face scaling down on their living standards whilst most will try to live within their means there are those who will abuse the system as they have not done a days work.

I’m sure many who have worked hard for what they have got in life and paid their fair share of taxes in return for a state pension when they have contributed to the system to receive a decent public services and state benefits should they have lost their livelihood they will be entitled to receive state benefits to help them out until they regain employment I’m sure when they learn of stories like a parent with 11 children has two homes converted into one property it’s no wonder why people gets angry which the press and social media will continue to rant on about.

This leads me to say it no wonder why the coalition is taking this hard-line and in the process they tarnish all those people on benefits with the same brush. Yet on the other-side of the coin there are those who are receiving benefits who wants to work can’t find work due to the skills they have learned has been outdated they are the ones are who are retraining by learning new skills but as usual there is not enough jobs available unless there is a radical change takes place I’m afraid there will always be job shortage there is still time for the coalition to change directions by revisiting their social policies and help simulating the economy further by investing more in employment not just in the private sector but also in the public sector as the two works hand in hand if the coalition don’t change they will be part of the problem just look towards the USA notice that their local government is in partial shutdown which they can’t pay their local government staff all because the Republicans with the strong backing of the tea party wants President Obama to abundant his Health Care Plan which will be of benefit for the many and not the few who can afford health insurance.

In my opinion both David Cameron, Nick Clegg, George Osborne  and Iain Duncan smith are rubbing his hands with glee all the way to the bank at our expense as they have the full blessing of the right-wing press and television whilst the low and middle-income picks up the crumbs of the table wonder when they able to put rice on the table and look after our children to give a better life we never had as they are the future of tomorrow.

Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, discloses the move in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph in which he outlines proposals to make the workforce “more mobile”.

The controversial plan echoes the words of Norman Tebbit in 1981 when he told the unemployed to “get on your bike” and look for work. It is part of tough action to cut spiralling welfare bills and tackle Britain’s record deficit.

Last week a major shake-up of housing benefit and increased health checks for disability claimants were announced as part of the biggest cuts in public spending for almost a century.

Mr Duncan Smith, the MP for Lord Tebbit’s former parliamentary seat of Chingford, disclosed that ministers were drawing up plans to encourage jobless people living in council houses to move out of unemployment black spots to homes in other areas, perhaps hundreds of miles away.

The former Conservative Party leader said millions of people were “trapped in estates where there is no work” and could not move because they would lose their accommodation.

The proposed scheme would allow them to go to the top of the housing list in another area rather than lose their right to a home if they moved.

“We have over the years, not us personally but successive governments, created one of the most static workforces in the western world,” Mr Duncan Smith said. “In Britain now we have workforces that are locked to areas and the result of that is we have over five-and-a-half million people of working age who simply don’t do a job.

“Often they are trapped in estates where there is no work near there and – because they have a lifetime tenure of that house – to go to work from east London to west London, or Bristol, or whatever is too much of a risk because if you up sticks and go you will have lost your right to your house.

“The local council is going to tell you that you don’t have a right to a house there, the housing association is not going to give you one.

“We have to look at how we get that portability, so that people can be more flexible, can look for work, can take the risk to do it.”

It is understood that the Coalition is looking at ways to provide incentives for workers to move to areas where there are jobs, rather than compelling them to move.

“Sometimes they may be lucky because work comes to those areas, we can reinvigorate it by regional tax reductions, so that’s all right where there are old coal mines and things, but you also need to have an element of flexibility.

“Sometimes you just need to be able to move to the work,” Mr Duncan Smith said.

As the welfare shake-up continues, ministers will unveil measures in the coming weeks to “make work pay” including changing the threshold at which claims are withdrawn so people who take work do not lose all their benefits.

But as well as incentives, there will be tough action to cut welfare bills which may prove controversial. Mr Duncan Smith, who is responsible for finding £11 billion of the extra £32 billion in savings earmarked by the Chancellor, disclosed details of moves to tackle “under occupation” of large council homes.

Last week, the Coalition said it would reform the housing benefit system to stop the state paying up to £100,000 a year in some cases to house families in expensive areas. But Mr Duncan Smith suggested that a tightening of the rules could apply more widely, meaning single occupiers or couples without children could be asked to leave larger houses. “We have tons of elderly people living in houses which they cannot run and we’ve got queues of desperate people with families who are living in one and two-bedroom houses and flats,” he said. Councils would be given more money in a hardship allowance to help families relocate, “to smooth this over, to encourage people to move”.

Mr Duncan Smith said the “excesses” of some council tenants living in large homes in expensive areas would end, adding: “We need to exert some downward pressure on this now.”

Every prime minister facing an imminent general election likes to enthuse his troops and the electorate at party conference by listing all the good things his government’s done.

David Cameron can’t because he has no positive achievements to publicise. He has the millionaires’ April tax break, the ongoing cuts in corporation tax, the uninterrupted profit and bonus bonanzas for banks and privatised utilities and the latest boost for property speculators through state-guaranteed mortgage deposits.

But how can he boast of these government policies?

People might draw the unmistakable conclusion that, despite pre-election chat about compassionate conservatism and an end to the nasty party, Cameron and company remain in thrall to the rich and powerful.

The Prime Minister’s sole message was a plea for voters to trust him and give him a chance to “finish the job we’ve started.”

It was classic Tory “jam tomorrow,” offering a land of opportunity in the future and a hard unrewarding grind for most people at present.

Every flat surface and even flatter speech at Tory conference was spattered with references to “hard-working people,” – the Tories‘ target for the 2015 election.

But the only pitch in their direction was flattery and favourable comparison with the millions of people denied the right to work, whom the government demeans as choosing a life on benefits.

In the real world, away from the Shangri-La populated by privately educated multimillionaire ministers, hard-working people are taking it on the chin every day.

Their average hourly rate of pay has fallen by 5.5 per cent since the conservative coalition took office, their pension contributions have increased to deliver less and price inflation continues to rise by 2.7 per cent according to CPI and 3.3 per cent for RPI, even though both measures underestimate the true cost of living for the low-paid.

Cameron brays about new jobs created by the private sector, but the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development calculates that a million of these are zero-hours contracts – four times the government estimate.

Housing is increasingly a nightmare for working people, with precious few new-build council homes and an impending government-generated house-price boom to make home ownership less possible for first-time buyers.

All Cameron could do to urge his audience into standing ovations was to rabbit on about nasty party patron saint Margaret Thatcher, the world’s “finest armed forces” and a point-scoring rejoinder to an anonymous Russian official that Britain is “a small island but a great country.”

His speech was a latter-day confirmation of Winston Churchill’s 1904 description of the Tories.

He called them “a party of great vested interests, banded together in a formidable confederation, corruption at home, aggression to cover it up abroad … sentiment by the bucketful, patriotism by the imperial pint, the open hand at the public exchequer, the open door at the public house, dear food for the millions, cheap labour for the millionaire.”

They are still backed by big business and the mass media, but the party’s membership is evaporating, from over 253,000 when Cameron became leader to 134,000 today, with an average age of 68.

This floundering government ought to be as easy to unseat as John Major’s in 1997.

But it will require clear and decisive policies that overturn Tory priorities, really challenge their big business allies and guarantee a speedy improvement in working people’s standard of living.

British citizenship test tightened to include English test

My thoughts on British citizenship test tightened to include English test for immigrants or rather economic migrants:

“Yesterday (Wed 17th April, 2013) saw a sad day for equalities’ communities, although you wouldn’t know it from the newspapers and media etc today. Yesterday (Tuesday 16th April, 2013) in Parliament, the Conservative (coalition) government voted (by 310 v 244) to get rid of the general Equality Duty (to promote and address inequality) that applies to all statutory sector organisations and all those organisations commissioned by them.

What it means for you and your families who work

you’ve lost quite a few Equality rights in the UK now, and this affects everyone. Here’s what it means for you in a nutshell:

(1) people’s ability to achieve their potential is limited by prejudice or discrimination.
(2) there is no respect for and protection of each individual’s human rights.
(3) there is no respect for the dignity and worth of each individual.
(4) each individual does not have an equal opportunity to participate in society.
(5) there is no mutual respect between groups based on understanding and valuing of diversity and on shared respect for equality and human rights.

This important news story, got lost got ignored by the UK Press and Media. The only way to tell people about this change, is either to blog or produce a press release about it, and make sure the media knows about these changes.

The House of Lords repealed this. The Coalition Government… didn’t. They know what they were changing.”

For some time I have spoken about equality, multiculturalism, diversity and immigration in the UK. I even mentioned that I’m a proud son of an immigrant as my father and mother have contributed to this country which allowed myself and my siblings to be educated in this country.

When I look around our great nation and able to see multiculturalism and diversity I can’t help to reflect if our parents were not able to hold a decent conversation in English and would they able to get by without our help. The answer will be mixed as I begin visited various communities I note with concern that there are still some communities are not willing to accept change to able to speak English and they still depend on family ties to help them to fill out forms and translate for them.

Which is still worrying in one sense the other is both successful governments in the UK have tried to address without success. Until the current government start to address the social policies or issue they are no further in moving forward this is because they are not addressing the root causes yet they continue to throw the problems back on immigration and they have to speak English to enter this country thinking it will be a vote winner.

David Cameron has the cheek to state that multiculturalism is failing and then continues to mention on radicalisation and the causes of terrorism.

At a security conference in Munich, he argued the UK needed a stronger national identity to prevent people turning to all kinds of extremism.

He also signalled a tougher stance on groups promoting Islamist extremism.

The speech angered some Muslim groups, while others queried its timing amid an English Defence League rally in the UK.

As Mr Cameron outlined his vision, he suggested there would be greater scrutiny of some Muslim groups which get public money but do little to tackle extremism.

Ministers should refuse to share platforms or engage with such groups, which should be denied access to public funds and barred from spreading their message in universities and prisons, he argued.

“Frankly, we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and much more active, muscular liberalism,” the prime minister said.

“Let’s properly judge these organisations: Do they believe in universal human rights – including for women and people of other faiths? Do they believe in equality of all before the law? Do they believe in democracy and the right of people to elect their own government? Do they encourage integration or separatism?

“These are the sorts of questions we need to ask. Fail these tests and the presumption should be not to engage with organisations,” he added.

The Labour MP for Luton South, Gavin Shuker, asked if it was wise for Mr Cameron to make the speech on the same day the English Defence League staged a major protest in his constituency.

There was further criticism from Labour’s Sadiq Khan whose comments made in a Daily Mirror article sparked a row. The shadow justice secretary was reported as saying Mr Cameron was “writing propaganda material for the EDL”.

Conservative Party chairman Baroness Warsi hit back, saying that “to smear the prime minister as a right wing extremist is outrageous and irresponsible”. She called on Labour leader Ed Miliband to disown the remarks.

It’s time the right hand knew what the far-right hand is doing”

Meanwhile, the Muslim Council of Britain‘s assistant secretary general, Dr Faisal Hanjra, described Mr Cameron’s speech as “disappointing”.

He told Radio 4’s Today programme: “We were hoping that with a new government, with a new coalition that there’d be a change in emphasis in terms of counter-terrorism and dealing with the problem at hand.

“In terms of the approach to tackling terrorism though it doesn’t seem to be particularly new.

“Again it just seems the Muslim community is very much in the spotlight, being treated as part of the problem as opposed to part of the solution.”

In the speech, Mr Cameron drew a clear distinction between Islam the religion and what he described as “Islamist extremism” – a political ideology he said attracted people who feel “rootless” within their own countries.

“We need to be clear: Islamist extremism and Islam are not the same thing,” he said.

The government is currently reviewing its policy to prevent violent extremism, known as Prevent, which is a key part of its wider counter-terrorism strategy.

InayatBunglawala from Muslims4Uk says Mr Cameron is “firing at the wrong target”

A genuinely liberal country “believes in certain values and actively promotes them”, Mr Cameron said.

“Freedom of speech which includes Freedom of worship, The rule of law, and Equal rights, regardless of race, sex or sexuality.

“It says to its citizens: This is what defines us as a society. To belong here is to believe these things.”

He said under the “doctrine of state multiculturalism”, different cultures have been encouraged to live separate lives.

“We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values.”

Building a stronger sense of national and local identity holds “the key to achieving true cohesion” by allowing people to say “I am a Muslim, I am a Hindu, I am a Christian, but I am a Londoner… too”, he said.

Security minister Baroness Neville-Jones said when Mr Cameron expressed his opposition to extremism; he meant all forms, not just Islamist extremism.

“There’s a widespread feeling in the country that we’re less united behind values than we need to be,” she informed the media.

“There are things the government can do to give a lead and encourage participation in society, including all minorities.”

But the Islamic Society of Britain’s Ajmal Masroor said the prime minister did not appreciate the nature of the problem.

“I think he’s confusing a couple of issues: national identity and multiculturalism along with extremism are not connected. Extremism comes about as a result of several other factors,” he told BBC Radio 5 live.

Former home secretary David Blunkett said while it was right the government promoted national identity, it had undermined its own policy by threatening to withdraw citizenship lessons from schools.

He accused Education Secretary Michael Gove of threatening to remove the subject from the national curriculum of secondary schools in England at a time “we’ve never needed it more”.

“It’s time the right hand knew what the far-right hand is doing,” he said.

“In fact, it’s time that the government were able to articulate one policy without immediately undermining it with another.”

I would like to challenge him to hold a public debate to address this issue in local communities across the country and stop using spin to address his ideology

I have to say that the government are living in the land of never, never. Instead of addressing the issues in their own backyard they are quite happy not finding the solutions of the 1000s of immigrates who enter this country with fake identities. Once they reach here they use different names to work or claim benefits. Some will argue you need to have a national insurance card to gain employment.

I beg to differ on the grounds that people who enter the UK by other means will find ways of obtaining a national insurance card, work permits by paying underground prices. Nor am I suggesting that every immigrants who came to this country came used the same route as most that came here during the 1940s to 1970s have contributed to society and provided employment to simulate the economy by the invitation of the government.

The Home Secretary and UK Boarders need to clamp down on the loopholes and engage more in the wider communities to grasp the nettle and stop pandering to fascism and racism of the far right parties. Sure it is a vote winner but at a very expensive cost. For years we give a good talk but still can’t do the walk.

I can understand why this has come up coupled with the problems of lack of social housing, and employment needs which is the main concern from the all sections of society instead this government are more concern about pleasing their rich donors to the Conservatives. The same argument is being used by the government to undermine Labour by saying that the Trade Unions are the pay masters of Labour Party.

I don’t have a problem per say for people who want to enter the UK to gain employment but the test must be done fairly across the board for people applying for British citizenship are to be set a compulsory English exam.

From October 2013, all those wishing to settle in the UK will have to pass an English language course as well as the existing test on life in the UK.

And that has now been extended to cover applicants for citizenship.

English-speakers applying for citizenship have currently only to take the life-in-the-UK test, which is in English.

If they are not English speakers or skilled migrants, they must pass a course in English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) which contains citizenship materials.

Immigration Minister Mark Harper said the changes would “ensure that migrants are ready and able to integrate into British society”.

In a letter to Keith Vaz MP, Home Secretary Theresa May said: “It would clearly be wrong for people to be able to become British citizens with a lower level of English than that expected from permanent residents.”

In some ways the images I have is when I see the Home Secretary in her bid to outdo the Iron Lady by pushing the right wing agenda in the hope of a leadership challenge to David Cameron should he not succeed in winning the next General Elections in 2015.

 

.

 

Nasty Party Pulls the plug Cross Party on Leveson Agreement Before Conservative Spring Conference

My thoughts on Leveson Report

I fully believe that the Leveson Report should be implemented and stop pussyfooting around as we all aware that the Conservatives Spring Conference is due to begin today and their donors are impatient with Cameron.

I’m not surprised or shock that the Nasty Party pulled out the crossed party over Leveson Report on the grounds that they never had any intention of implement any of the recommendation of the report with the support of their coalition partner or Labour.

Let us all be clear if phones were not hacked this problem would not have happened in the first place. I have more time for the Hack Off Campaign group than this coalition. I believe that all campaigns hold members of parliament (MP) to account as they are voters just like you and me. My message to coalition is “Pick sense of nonsense”.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the Conservatives donors are pulling the buttons of David Cameron to water down Leveson Report and they have to play the blame game on Labour again by accusing the Hack off campaign having a hold on Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg.

If there has been any hijacking, it was by the powerful interests whose publications conspired to breach citizens’ privacy in pursuit of higher circulation and profits and are now intent on promoting the mirage of regulation rather than its essence.

These mouthpieces for the rich and powerful are trying to pull the wool over their readers’ eyes by affecting to stand up against statutory regulation of the press.

Statutory underpinning of media self-regulation is far from statutory regulation of the press, but the media moguls propagate this myth to paint themselves as guardians of press freedom against “Stalinist” enforcers of uniformity led by the Hacked Off campaign and National Union of Journalists leader Michelle Stanistreet.

It beggars belief that these smug panjandrums can describe the media in Britain as “free of political control for 300 years,” when most of our newspapers offer a severely restricted right-wing viewpoint.

Absence of direct state control does not equate to freedom, as Rupert Murdoch’s dictatorial prescription of what is acceptable in his stable of newspapers illustrates clearly.

It would require the most abject betrayal of political principle by Nick Clegg for Liberal Democrat MPs to troop into the division lobbies next Monday behind David Cameron’s attempt to bury Leveson.

While such a possibility can never be discounted, Cameron’s decision to simply pull the plug on joint talks with Clegg and Labour leader Ed Miliband was sufficiently contemptuous to have forced even the Liberal Democrat leader to declare that this worm is finally for turning.

His party, in common with Labour, has insisted that Cameron’s Royal Charter without statutory underpinning is inadequate and an insult to the Leveson inquiry and the witnesses who testified.

To the surprise of no-one at all, Cameron has secured backing from major media transnational corporations including the Daily Mail Group, the Telegraph Media Group and Rupert Murdoch’s News International.

The executives of these capitalist conglomerates share Cameron’s misrepresentation of talks on regulation as having been “hijacked” by those demanding legislation.

If there has been any hijacking, it was by the powerful interests whose publications conspired to breach citizens’ privacy in pursuit of higher circulation and profits and are now intent on promoting the mirage of regulation rather than its essence.

These mouthpieces for the rich and powerful are trying to pull the wool over their readers’ eyes by affecting to stand up against statutory regulation of the press.

Statutory underpinning of media self-regulation is far from statutory regulation of the press, but the media moguls propagate this myth to paint themselves as guardians of press freedom against “Stalinist” enforcers of uniformity led by the Hacked Off campaign and National Union of Journalists leader Michelle Stanistreet.

It beggars belief that these smug panjandrums can describe the media in Britain as “free of political control for 300 years,” when most of our newspapers offer a severely restricted right-wing viewpoint.

Absence of direct state control does not equate to freedom, as Rupert Murdoch’s dictatorial prescription of what is acceptable in his stable of newspapers illustrates clearly.

His slippery “I remember nothing” performance before Leveson, together with his son’s “no-one told me anything” act, should caution acceptance of Cameron’s cosmetic variation of the discredited model of voluntary self-regulation that has served media proprietors so well.

However, it has not served the public interest, as the shameless treatment of countless individuals has revealed, most disgracefully and heartlessly in the case of Millie Dowler’s family.

Leveson’s proceedings provided a window on the misdeeds of sections of the media that believed themselves invulnerable because of wealth and political connections.

How that media operates in future is too important to be left to the rich and powerful and their parliamentary pawns on the Tory Party front bench.

This Cameron-supporting claque does not speak for all the media. Apart from the Morning Star, the Financial Times, Independent and Guardian groups all accept the need for statutory underpinning.

This is despite not having indulged in any of the illegal practices brought to light by Leveson, which have tainted the entire media in the eyes of the public.

Politicians who resist the tidal wave of propaganda in support of Cameron’s bid to circumvent Leveson can expect to be monstered as enemies of press freedom by the usual suspects.

So MPs will require political backbone and a thick skin to vote down the Prime Minister’s Royal Charter charade on Monday.

In regards to the Cockroach Party (Liberal Democrats) they have a history of being a turn coats when it suit them. Remember the 1970s coalition agreement see link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lib%E2%80%93Lab_pact

See article below:

A day of talks over implementing the Leveson report on press reform, including a joint meeting between the Hacked Off campaign and the Labour and Liberal Democrat leaderships, failed to achieve a breakthrough on Tuesday.

Hacked Off, which represents victims of press intrusion such as Kate and Gerry McCann, met with Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband to see if fresh proposals from the Conservatives took the complex negotiations to a conclusion that could satisfy all those involved.

There had been hopes that all three leaders, Clegg, Miliband and David Cameron, would meet to seal a deal on Tuesday evening, but in the end too many disagreements remained for them to come together.

A Hacked Off source said they were “still far apart on vital issues”, including whether the press would be able to write its own code of practice, and whether the industry would be able to veto appointments to a revamped Press Complaints Commission. However, the PM’s spokesman said progress was being made.

Talks on Monday night between Oliver Letwin, Cameron’s policy fixer, the culture secretary, Maria Miller, Labour’s shadow culture secretary, Harriet Harman, and Lord Wallace for the Liberal Democrats, led to fresh proposals on how a body enshrined in a royal charter to oversee the work of the PCC would be implemented.

Various ideas have been advanced to make the royal charter permanent, including the suggestion that a law could be introduced that does not refer to the oversight body specifically but says that any royal charter that a future government wants to change cannot be amended by the privy council alone.

“This would not be sector-specific,” the source said, but would be a statute about royal charters. The idea has been advanced by the barrister Hugh Tomlinson, one of the lawyers informally advising Hacked Off and an expert on press regulation.

The Conservatives had previously proposed a royal charter as a way of ensuring a permanent body is set up to oversee and verify the new press regulatory body proposed by Leveson. Cameron had resisted Leveson’s recommendation that a revamped PCC should be underpinned by a law.

Both Labour and the Liberal Democrats have been concerned the royal charter and the verifying body could be abolished in the future at the whim of a minister, unless they are backed by statute. There has also been disagreement over the extent to which the regulatory body should be chaired by an independent figure not employed by the press.

Cameron is caught between a need to satisfy a divided press industry and a desire to stick to his commitment to implement the principles behind the Leveson report.

The sticking points on Friday were that Conservatives were siding with newspapers such as the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph, who wanted a veto over appointments to the new body, control over the code of practice, and restrictions on third-party complaints.

Coalition on full scale attack on foreigners seeking benefits

Quote Of the Day:

No Retreat No Surrender

Thoughts on Benefits For Foreigner Review

Why is it that every successful governments in the UK continues to ride on a high by using two words “Soft Touch” this is because it stirs up everybody  and such it plays to the hands of both racists and fascists to which I make no apologies for saying this.

Until governments all over the world address the crisis it will be on going with no solutions at the end of the tunnel. In regards to benefits For Foreigners not all them who comes to the UK claim benefits, some create employment while others who claim benefits are from either refugee status or facing persecution from dictators or military from their country of origin. Then there economic migration which if I’m reading right then any governments that come to power will have an escalation of problems as they will look back to the root causes of it as endemic worldwide which dates back to the time of explorers, governments, kings and queens claiming lands in the name of country. Like it or lump it those are the facts.

Granted some will argue it’s a chip on their shoulders Great Britain is just as guilty for raiding and looting other people lands then leave the natives to fend for themselves under British rules whilst they were there drained their natural resources.

There maybe a the few who continue to moan about not able to get a council housing because all those foreigners are getting various benefits and they are the ones that are not getting it. I don’t have a problem with foreigners who want to access our benefit system provided that they meet the criteria and don’t abuse.
Then there is the workfare issue that needs to address as coalition lost their case in court by saying it is ridiculous to call being made to work unpaid or force labour and has the cheek to oppose the suggestion that people who lost their benefits should have it reinstated.
Why has the coalition gone done this road to punish our Carers for looking after our disabled. Most Carers does a wonderful job not just for personal care for people with disabilities they are the bed rock of our society. Most would say they deserve the recognition for the work they do and that they are the unsung heroes.#

As I said in previous communications that we should not continue to pander to the Far Right Agendas of the British National Party(BNP) and English Defence League (EDL) let us all continue to celebrate our diversity and multiculturalism that we all enjoy in our society today.

See article below:

The government is reviewing access to housing, healthcare and the benefits system for foreign nationals to ensure that the UK is not a “soft touch”, Prime Minister David Cameron has said.

At his weekly Commons question session, he said he had chaired a committee looking into current policy: “It isn’t right if our systems are being abused.”

The rights of British citizens should not be enjoyed by “anyone who just chooses to come here”, he told MPs.

Tory Mark Spencer had raised the issue.

“The welfare state and the NHS are there to support our constituents when they fall on difficult times,” Mr Spencer said.

“Will the prime minister assure the House that he will not allow them to be abused by illegal immigrants and nationals who are coming here as benefit tourists?”

‘Undue pressures’

Mr Cameron said this was “a very important point” and said he had chaired a committee meeting on Tuesday to look into the subject.

“Britain has always been an open and welcome economy, but it isn’t right if our systems are being abused,” he told MPs.

The review of “every single one of our systems: housing, health, benefits”, was being led by immigration minister Mark Harper, he said, and would “make sure that we are not a soft touch for those who want to come here”.

“It is absolutely vital that we get this right,” he told MPs.

“There are many parts of our current arrangements that simply don’t pass a simple common-sense test, in terms of access to housing, access to the health service, access to justice and other things which should be the right of all British citizens, but they’re not the right of anyone who just chooses to come here.”

The prime minister’s spokesman later warned that the committee’s work was “likely to take some time” and any proposals would have to “operate within the constraints of the law”.

But the government was keen to “ensure there were not undue pressures on the smooth running of the labour market in the UK”, he said.

Mr Cameron’s decision to chair the meeting yesterday, in place of his immigration minister, “pointed to the importance he attaches to this area of work”, the spokesman added.

The prime minister has previously said the government would be reviewing current policy when asked about the lifting on restrictions from January 2014 on Bulgarians and Romanians working the UK.