Tag Archives: Liberal Democrats

Don’t trust Conservatives to run our public services which side are you on public or private sectors

The chancellor or the prime minister could not give a flying monkeys if our growth goes up or down as long as they get pay cheque paid into their bank account(s) every month complements of the taxpayers and in return public service workers gets kick between the legs with less pay increase and more cuts to public services. The lower your income the more you will get smacked in the face with further increases in food, and energy prices and mobile bills which pushes people to join longer queues outside the foodbanks and junk food projects to feed their families just to make ends meet.

Who remembers who Ice Queen Theresa May first speech outside 10 Downing Street, here is the full speech she made:

I have just been to Buckingham Palace, where Her Majesty The Queen has asked me to form a new government, and I accepted.

In David Cameron, I follow in the footsteps of a great, modern Prime Minister. Under David’s leadership, the government stabilised the economy, reduced the budget deficit, and helped more into work than ever before.

But David’s true legacy is not about the economy but about social justice. From the introduction of same sex marriage,  to taking people on low wages out of income tax altogether; David Cameron has led a one-nation government, and it is in that spirit that I also plan to lead.

Because not everybody knows this, but the full title of my party is the Conservative and Unionist Party, and that word ‘unionist’ is very important to me.

It means we believe in the Union: the precious, precious bond between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. But it means something else that is just as important; it means we believe in a union not just between the nations of the United Kingdom but between all of our citizens, every one of us, whoever we are and wherever we’re from.

That means fighting against the burning injustice that, if you’re born poor, you will die on average 9 years earlier than others.

If you’re black, you’re treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you’re white.

If you’re a white, working-class boy, you’re less likely than anybody else in Britain to go to university.

If you’re at a state school, you’re less likely to reach the top professions than if you’re educated privately.

If you’re a woman, you will earn less than a man. If you suffer from mental health problems, there’s not enough help to hand.

If you’re young, you’ll find it harder than ever before to own your own home.

But the mission to make Britain a country that works for everyone means more than fighting these injustices. If you’re from an ordinary working class family, life is much harder than many people in Westminster realise. You have a job but you don’t always have job security. You have your own home, but you worry about paying a mortgage. You can just about manage but you worry about the cost of living and getting your kids into a good school.

If you’re one of those families, if you’re just managing, I want to address you directly.

I know you’re working around the clock, I know you’re doing your best, and I know that sometimes life can be a struggle. The government I lead will be driven not by the interests of the privileged few, but by yours.

We will do everything we can to give you more control over your lives. When we take the big calls, we’ll think not of the powerful, but you. When we pass new laws, we’ll listen not to the mighty but to you. When it comes to taxes, we’ll prioritise not the wealthy, but you. When it comes to opportunity, we won’t entrench the advantages of the fortunate few. We will do everything we can to help anybody, whatever your background, to go as far as your talents will take you.

We are living through an important moment in our country’s history. Following the referendum, we face a time of great national change.

And I know because we’re Great Britain, that we will rise to the challenge. As we leave the European Union, we will forge a bold new positive role for ourselves in the world, and we will make Britain a country that works not for a privileged few, but for every one of us.

That will be the mission of the government I lead, and together we will build a better Britain.

If you ask the ordinary Joe Blogs out in the real world they would say the conservatives are not the party for the working class they are more for the rich and they have their finger in every pie and they will shaft you as soon as they get what they want form you. Look at what they did to the coal miners and manufacturing industries.

It is highly noticeable that childcare vouchers have been put on hold by six months by conservative ministers with the full support of bed partners DUP helped to secure voting against Labour motion here is the list of conservative and DUP who proudly voted against the opposition motion see names below: 

Here is the list of MPs who voted against the motion:

Conservative (304)

Adams, Nigel
Afolami, Bim
Afriyie, Adam
Aldous, Peter
Allan, Lucy
Allen, Heidi
Amess, Sir David
Andrew, Stuart
Argar, Edward
Atkins, Victoria
Bacon, Mr Richard
Badenoch, Mrs Kemi
Baker, Mr Steve
Baldwin, Harriett
Barclay, Stephen
Baron, Mr John
Bebb, Guto
Bellingham, Sir Henry
Benyon, rh Richard
Beresford, Sir Paul
Berry, Jake
Blackman, Bob
Blunt, Crispin
Boles, Nick
Bone, Mr Peter
Bottomley, Sir Peter
Bowie, Andrew
Bradley, Ben
Bradley, rh Karen
Brady, Sir Graham
Brereton, Jack
Bridgen, Andrew
Brine, Steve
Brokenshire, rh James
Bruce, Fiona
Buckland, Robert
Burghart, Alex
Burns, Conor
Burt, rh Alistair
Cairns, rh Alun
Cartlidge, James
Cash, Sir William
Caulfield, Maria
Chalk, Alex
Chishti, Rehman
Chope, Sir Christopher
Churchill, Jo
Clark, Colin
Clark, rh Greg
Clarke, rh Mr Kenneth
Clarke, Mr Simon
Cleverly, James
Clifton-Brown, Sir Geoffrey
Coffey, Dr Thérèse
Collins, Damian
Costa, Alberto
Courts, Robert
Cox, Mr Geoffrey
Crabb, rh Stephen
Crouch, Tracey
Davies, Chris
Davies, David T. C.
Davies, Glyn
Davies, Mims
Davis, rh Mr David
Dinenage, Caroline
Djanogly, Mr Jonathan
Docherty, Leo
Donelan, Michelle
Double, Steve
Dowden, Oliver
Doyle-Price, Jackie
Drax, Richard
Duddridge, James
Duguid, David
Duncan, rh Sir Alan
Duncan Smith, rh Mr Iain
Dunne, Mr Philip
Ellis, Michael
Ellwood, rh Mr Tobias
Eustice, George
Evans, Mr Nigel
Evennett, rh David
Fabricant, Michael
Fallon, rh Sir Michael
Fernandes, Suella
Field, rh Mark
Ford, Vicky
Foster, Kevin
Fox, rh Dr Liam
Francois, rh Mr Mark
Frazer, Lucy
Freeman, George
Fysh, Mr Marcus
Garnier, Mark
Gauke, rh Mr David
Ghani, Ms Nusrat
Gibb, rh Nick
Gillan, rh Dame Cheryl
Glen, John
Goldsmith, Zac
Goodwill, Mr Robert
Gove, rh Michael
Graham, Luke
Graham, Richard
Grant, Bill
Grant, Mrs Helen
Grayling, rh Chris
Green, Chris
Green, rh Damian
Greening, rh Justine
Grieve, rh Mr Dominic
Griffiths, Andrew
Gyimah, Mr Sam
Hair, Kirstene
Halfon, rh Robert
Hall, Luke
Hammond, rh Mr Philip
Hammond, Stephen
Hancock, rh Matt
Hands, rh Greg
Harper, rh Mr Mark
Harrington, Richard
Harris, Rebecca
Harrison, Trudy
Hart, Simon
Hayes, rh Mr John
Heald, rh Sir Oliver
Heappey, James
Heaton-Harris, Chris
Heaton-Jones, Peter
Henderson, Gordon
Herbert, rh Nick
Hinds, rh Damian
Hoare, Simon
Hollingbery, George
Hollinrake, Kevin
Hollobone, Mr Philip
Holloway, Adam
Howell, John
Huddleston, Nigel
Hunt, rh Mr Jeremy
Hurd, rh Mr Nick
Jack, Mr Alister
James, Margot
Javid, rh Sajid
Jayawardena, Mr Ranil
Jenkin, Mr Bernard
Jenkyns, Andrea
Jenrick, Robert
Johnson, rh Boris
Johnson, Dr Caroline
Johnson, Gareth
Johnson, Joseph
Jones, Andrew
Jones, rh Mr David
Jones, Mr Marcus
Kawczynski, Daniel
Keegan, Gillian
Kennedy, Seema
Kerr, Stephen
Knight, rh Sir Greg
Knight, Julian
Kwarteng, Kwasi
Lamont, John
Lancaster, rh Mark
Leadsom, rh Andrea
Lee, Dr Phillip
Lefroy, Jeremy
Leigh, Sir Edward
Letwin, rh Sir Oliver
Lewer, Andrew
Lewis, rh Brandon
Lewis, rh Dr Julian
Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian
Lidington, rh Mr David
Lopez, Julia
Lopresti, Jack
Lord, Mr Jonathan
Loughton, Tim
Mackinlay, Craig
Maclean, Rachel
Main, Mrs Anne
Mak, Alan
Malthouse, Kit
Mann, Scott
Masterton, Paul
May, rh Mrs Theresa
Maynard, Paul
McLoughlin, rh Sir Patrick
McPartland, Stephen
McVey, rh Ms Esther
Menzies, Mark
Mercer, Johnny
Merriman, Huw
Metcalfe, Stephen
Milling, Amanda
Mills, Nigel
Milton, rh Anne
Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew
Moore, Damien
Mordaunt, rh Penny
Morgan, rh Nicky
Morris, Anne Marie
Morris, David
Morris, James
Murray, Mrs Sheryll
Murrison, Dr Andrew
Neill, Robert
Newton, Sarah
Nokes, rh Caroline
Norman, Jesse
O’Brien, Neil
Offord, Dr Matthew
Opperman, Guy
Parish, Neil
Patel, rh Priti
Pawsey, Mark
Penning, rh Sir Mike
Penrose, John
Percy, Andrew
Perry, rh Claire
Philp, Chris
Pincher, Christopher
Poulter, Dr Dan
Pow, Rebecca
Prentis, Victoria
Prisk, Mr Mark
Pritchard, Mark
Pursglove, Tom
Quin, Jeremy
Quince, Will
Raab, Dominic
Redwood, rh John
Rees-Mogg, Mr Jacob
Robertson, Mr Laurence
Robinson, Mary
Rosindell, Andrew
Ross, Douglas
Rowley, Lee
Rudd, rh Amber
Rutley, David
Sandbach, Antoinette
Scully, Paul
Seely, Mr Bob
Selous, Andrew
Shapps, rh Grant
Sharma, Alok
Shelbrooke, Alec
Simpson, rh Mr Keith
Skidmore, Chris
Smith, Chloe
Smith, Henry
Smith, rh Julian
Smith, Royston
Soames, rh Sir Nicholas
Soubry, rh Anna
Spelman, rh Dame Caroline
Spencer, Mark
Stephenson, Andrew
Stevenson, John
Stewart, Bob
Stewart, Iain
Stewart, Rory
Streeter, Mr Gary
Stride, rh Mel
Stuart, Graham
Sturdy, Julian
Sunak, Rishi
Swayne, rh Sir Desmond
Swire, rh Sir Hugo
Syms, Sir Robert
Thomas, Derek
Thomson, Ross
Throup, Maggie
Tolhurst, Kelly
Tomlinson, Justin
Tomlinson, Michael
Tracey, Craig
Tredinnick, David
Trevelyan, Mrs Anne-Marie
Truss, rh Elizabeth
Tugendhat, Tom
Vaizey, rh Mr Edward
Vara, Mr Shailesh
Vickers, Martin
Villiers, rh Theresa
Walker, Mr Charles
Walker, Mr Robin
Wallace, rh Mr Ben
Warburton, David
Warman, Matt
Watling, Giles
Whately, Helen
Wheeler, Mrs Heather
Whittaker, Craig
Whittingdale, rh Mr John
Wiggin, Bill
Williamson, rh Gavin
Wollaston, Dr Sarah
Wood, Mike
Wragg, Mr William
Wright, rh Jeremy
Zahawi, Nadhim

Democratic Unionist Party (10)

Campbell, Mr Gregory
Dodds, rh Nigel
Donaldson, rh Sir Jeffrey M.
Girvan, Paul
Little Pengelly, Emma
Paisley, Ian
Robinson, Gavin
Shannon, Jim
Simpson, David
Wilson, rh Sammy

Independent (1)

In further development Theresa May has been officially rebuked for misleading MPs and the public over false claims that the government is providing an extra £450m in funding to local police forces in 2018/19.

The chair of the UK Statistics Authority, Sir David Norgrove, ruled on Tuesday that the claim made by May repeatedly at prime minister’s questions last month “could have led the public to conclude incorrectly” that the government was providing an extra £450m for police spending over the next financial year.

Labour MPs are expected to try to challenge May over her misleading statements about police funding at prime minister’s questions on Wednesday.

The shadow police and crime minister, Louise Haigh, who made the complaint to the statistics watchdog, said that in fact there had been a “flat cash” settlement for police forces in England and Wales that actually amounted to a cut in direct Whitehall grants to the police in real terms. Haigh said the “extra £450m” would only be found if police and crime commissioners pushed through an increase to council tax to raise £270m. About £130m of the £450m is to go directly to “national police priorities” rather than local forces and a further £50m is to be provided for counter-terrorism funding.

The prime minister’s claim that local police force budgets were being boosted by £450m was repeated by Home Office tweets and in a letter sent out by Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the House of Commons.

“We have commented in the past about statements on police funding and emphasised the need for greater precision in the way numbers are used,” Norgrove told Haigh in his response to her complaint.

“In terms of the particular points you make, the prime minister’s statement and the Home Office’s tweet could have led the public to conclude incorrectly that central government is providing an additional £450m for police spending in 2018/19.

“The Home Office tweet also implied that the £450m sum is guaranteed. As the minister for policing’s statement outlined, up to £270m of the funding settlement will come from local council tax, if police and crime commissioners and mayors choose to raise these sums. In addition, the leader of the House of Commons stated that the £270m that can be raised locally was on top of the overall settlement of up to £450m,” wrote Norgrove.

The statistics watchdog said complex funding arrangements were difficult to explain in the “time compressed context” of PMQs but said the Home Office did not face this constraint in its tweet. He suggested the Home Office’s head of statistics made sure his colleagues understood the structure of police funding and the importance of making clear public statements.

Haigh called for the PM to apologise. She said: “The Tories are not being straight with the public on police funding and now they have been found out. See article below:



Council tax bills on the up. Public services neglected, outsourced, privatised. People are being let down by their local authorities across the country, and they are acutely aware of it. Whether their council is controlled by Labour or Tories, it’s likely that in May they’ll put the blame where it belongs – with the Tory government.

Over the last eight years, council budgets have been reduced by 50 per cent. The cuts aren’t evenly distributed either, with the most deprived local authorities actually being hit by deeper cuts than the rest.

The Local Government Association says children’s services need £2bn to plug the funding gap. Faced with a surge in demand, councils are having to surpass their budgets to protect children at immediate risk of harm.

Of course each problem is connected. A family becomes homeless and gets placed in temporary accommodation, maybe a single room in a hostel. The children have no space to do their homework, so their performance at school declines. They’re tired; there is drug-taking and anti-social behaviour in the building and the police are called out regularly. Their mother’s mental health worsens, she start taking anti-depressants.

I truly don’t mean to sound glib – I’m describing a situation that I encountered many times as a parliamentary caseworker. One isolated event, like a private landlord serving its tenants with an eviction notice, leads to pressure on housing, welfare, emergency services, health, education, and so on.

As Corbyn says, the May elections are a chance for people to send a clear message: “enough is enough”. See article below from Sienna Rodgers LabourList


How can you trust the Conservatives to run our beloved public services when the UK’s new homelessness minister has told the Guardian she does not know why the number of rough sleepers has increased so significantly in recent years. Heather Wheeler said she did not accept the suggestion that welfare reforms and council cuts had contributed to the rise.

On a visit to a housing project in Glasgow, Wheeler said she remained “totally confident” she would not have to act on her pledge to resign should she fail to meet the Conservative manifesto commitment of halving rough sleeping by 2022, and eradicating it by 2027. “We’re going to move heaven and earth to get that done,” she promised. See article below:


The question still remains who do you trust to run our public services I say “Don’t trust Conservatives to run our public services which side are you on public or private sectors” If you are thinking to vote Conservatives and care about Public services then the Conservatives is not the party for you. If you want a better future want to see improvements in services to public services then I would strongly suggest that you vote for Labour on 3 May to improve public services.



Staire: Continue to Vote conservative and get more of the same

Many people doing such great things to feed and clothe and shelter the homeless and rough sleepers during Christmas and New Year’s Eve. What if we all pool our energy and efforts to support groups like Acorn and Shelter and other charities to say Housing and Services are needed now.

Whilst I acknowledge the Commonwealth games seem a great opportunity unless we deal with the very real tragedy of homelessness and rough sleepers (drugs, begging) literally on our doorstep are we going to end up with death squads clearing the streets so tourists (with cash) don’t have to see them. It is austerity and capitalism and rich people avoiding taxes that underlie these problems.

Don’t know whether to laugh or cry over the recent reshuffle one minute Jeremy Hunt is going as reported then it’s suddenly “Please miss let me stay and give an added responsibility by adding social care on top of my profile to say Heath and Social Care. In reply Ice Queen (Theresa May) yes my dear it’s granted. Poor old Justine Greening wanting to hold on to her post and stood her grounds only for her to leave in tears from Downing St by quitting before she face the sack.
The princess of darkness(Esther Mcvey) who is loathe by the disabled community takes on the post of DWP minister who is the former minister for employment.

Have a listen to this  about our beloved NHS Youtube:

Our NHS is in crisis caused by lack of funding, bed blocking, staff morale down, they are over worked and underpaid. The lame excuse from Ice Queen (Theresa May) was expected by giving a half-baked apology then then she has the gull to say that more investments has been put in NHS. This reminds me of a song Nick Clegg I’m sorry see YouTube below:

Hospitals in England are now seeing very high rates of patients with flu according to Public Health England figures up to 78% in this week they suggest it could be the worst flu season for seven years.

Am I seeing doubles now, who remembers the advert on the Leave Bus campaign claiming our beloved National Health Service(NHS) will be better of by £350 million it now transpired its too low it should be £362 million and raise to £438 million by the end of the end of the post Brexit transition period see article below:


To sum it up nicely Paula Peters a Facebook friend puts it very eloquently in her poems:

The NHS is in Crisis Budget squeezed and now it is lifeless
21 NHS trusts declared a black alert The Tories excuses are bloody absurd Patients sleeping on corridor floors

Doctors and nurses working all hours, can’t take anymore
Operations cancelled, outpatient appointments too
Theresa May does not have a bloody clue

Patients denied the treatment that they really need
Tories cutting the heart from the NHS and watching it bleed
Many doctors and nurses positions left unfilled
Tories want private healthcare, where patients will be billed

Tories want Richard Branson and circle healthcare
Well we want the NHS, so stop right there!
Branson can’t run a GP service, or any health care trust
We must rise up in large numbers, put a stop to him we must

We all use a GP service, and may need an A and E
We may need orthopaedics and neurology!
We want the NHS fully staffed and fully funded
We want the NHS that Nye Bevan founded.

Iain Duncan Smith the architect of Universal Credit
Wanted everyone working, yes he said it
Designed with punitive punishment at its heart
Universal Credit is about ripping the welfare state apart

Work more hours! Go get a job!
Denying you support, DWP cheats and robs
Ramping up sanctions, they simply don’t care
They want you to work for nothing on workfare

Universal Credit is failing, many people say
But the Government are continuing the roll out, come what may
It is now the co production of the DWP and NHS
Universal Credit has had many delays, it’s a bloody mess!

It’s ramping up homelessness and poverty too
This government do not care what it will put claimants through
Abolishing severe disability allowance
We must mount the campaign to stop it and show the government defiance

Data sharing your information, checking if the claimant is cheating
Left with little money, making stark choices between heating and eating
Online forms that are completely inaccessible
Universal Credit is totally incomprehensible

DWP have the nudge unit and behavior compliance
We now see National Charity Mind and DWP formed an alliance
Psycho Compulsion and forced treatment, to target those with Depression
Go to the job centre for 6 CBT sessions

Making disabled people attend the health and work conversation
If you Do not attend it; your money will be rationed
Work coaches with 3 weeks of training
The questions they will ask will be intensive and draining

Do you see friends, do you see family?
What can you do to keep your sanity?
Have you any hobbies, what are you strengths?
Claimants lives turned inside out, the DWP go to any lengths

Can only claim for 2 children, you can’t claim for more
The nasty rape clause in Universal Credit can see your jaw hit the floor
A woman to prove she has been raped, pushed to the edge can’t take anymore
You ask what the government are doing it for

The answer a simple one, to shrink the state
It is ideological, claimants they hate
They want everyone working, not claiming a thing
Causing destitution in the process and the chaos it brings

If claimants give up not claiming, so much the better
Keep harassing the claimants with those brown envelope letters
Stress the claimant and make them cry
Deny support to disabled people and hope many die

Universal Credit is a nasty system, yes it is true
It is harmful and hateful and will put people through
Punitive punishment and sanctions ramped up
Searching for work for 35 hours, so here is a heads up!

We need to stop and scrap Universal Credit
Yes you heard right and now have said it
Universal Credit is unfixable, it now needs to go
Let us campaign together united, and make it so!

A close friend of mine Anne Marie Gallager sums it up when she says:
So all my life and now as a pensioner (ps it’s not that great – an ill health occupational pension after working very hard for decades on not great pay but that’s what most of us everyday people do) I have paid and still pay direct and indirect taxes.

But all I see and hear now after 8 years of austerity for most of us too few staff in schools, hospitals, emergency services, libraries wanting to charge old women for space for a sewing group community centres chucking out the old domino players as they can’t pay, libraries barely open, so called free Wifi of terrible quality, charities etc having to jump through hoops to get funding from the lottery. Homelessness and destitution is growing. Universal credit is a disaster. Places like homes and centres for the elderly and Ryton – either closing or threatened with closure if they don’t become businesses.

You can’t profit from public services they are a way to create common good.
I did not and never will vote to treat the poor in an evil manner. We all need basics we can afford those who are fit need work, work that needs to be done is there in plain sight.

Chris Lowe another friend of mine sums this up eloquently when he says:
Take back control” was one of the slogans of the Leave campaign – but who was control being taken back from? Although a lot was said about letting Britain make her own laws again, attacks like this on the role of parliament in holding government to account suggest that MPs are not supposed to be taking back control themselves.

The language then and since has suggested that a liberal ‘elite’ are seen as attacking against the interests of the ‘British people’ and more in the interests of the EU. The referendum is referred to as the ‘British people’ expressing their will and MPs are supposed to follow that decision.

Yet this simplistic appeal to ‘the will of the people’ has more in common with dictatorial governments (remember most of those engineer elections to give themselves a false impression of democracy) than with our representative parliamentary system.

The Daily Mail seems to be getting more rabid in its attacks on elected representatives. This kind of attack on parliamentary process is damaging to trust in our democratic system, and is something that we should all be worried about.

The Daily Mail is run by a tax-dodging elite who have had more influence on British politics over the last 40 years than any of the MPs on their front page today. If we want to find an out-of-touch elite who do not understand or care about the struggles of the ‘British people’, we need look no further than the Daily Mail. These attacks on British democracy are not intended to help us, but rather to weaken us and open us up to further rape by tax-dodging multinationals.

Have to say that that the London Mayor(Sadiq Khan) hits the nail on the head by stating that a hard Brexit could lead to a lost decade of lower growth. He said a no deal outcome in which UK left both EU customs union and single market could cost the country half a million jobs and £50bn in lost investment by 2030. The finding came from research he had commissioned from  analysis Cambridge Econometrics and he called on the government to alter its strategy in talks with Brussels.

Here are some facts that the Leave campaign does not want to admit to such as see link below:

Ten things the EU has done for you
Europhiles and Eurosceptics can argue until the cows come home about whether membership of the EU brings more benefits or disadvantages.But both sides can agree that many, if not most, of the laws passed in the 27 member states stem from EU legislation.

To mark the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome on 25 March, we note here 10 things the EU has done for the ordinary citizen.


Here’s a song to sing along

Time to kick the Tories out, to the tune of John Brown’s body:

Chorus:  No more cuts to public services
No more cuts to public services
No more cuts to public services
It’s time to kick the Tories out

Universal credit’s not the welfare people need
It doesn’t fit the bill when there’s a family to feed
Six weeks to wait for money is a very long time indeed
And it’s time to kick the Tories out

Amazon and Google never pay their share of tax
They have their offshore havens where their millions are stashed
While thousands in our cities have no clothes upon their backs
And nowhere to lay their heads

They say that our prosperity depends on HS2
But libraries are closing and children’s centres too
I don’t think they’ll reopen when the train is coming through
At a cost of 56 billion pounds

It’s time to end austerity, it only causes stress
It’s time to build more houses and support the NHS
It’s time to end the pay cap for our nurses, teachers, YES!
It’s time to kick the Tories out

The Tories continue to fail young people on education, housing, employment and living standards. I can only conclude that a Labour government will scrap student fees, restore education maintenance grants & end the discrimination in the minimum wage.

This is in despite of all the gimmicks, the jokes and the distractions  today was a ‘nothing has changed’ Budget from an out-of-touch Government with no idea of the reality of people’s lives and no plan to improve them.

The Budget has confirmed what we already knew that we are worse off under the Tories and it’s set to get worse. Economic growth is the lowest since the Tories came to office, real wages lower than in 2010, and the failure to pause the botched roll-out of Universal Credit will cause real suffering. The Chancellor has completely lost the plot and failed to recognise the scale of the emergency in our public services and found no meaningful funding to address the crisis in our schools, hospitals or children’s services.

Make sure people know. Share the truth about this Budget now.

Labour would take a different approach and build an economy for the many, not the few. We would scrap the public sector pay cap for the whole of the public sector; pause and fix the Universal Credit roll-out; introduce a real living wage of at least £10 an hour by 2020 and an energy price cap. Together we can stand-up against this failed Tory Government. Get involved with an event near you this weekend. What a few weeks it’s been for the conservatives and one wonders if its business as usual for them as a growing number of MPs(Conservatives) are allegedly being investigated over their past conduct towards women. Let’s not forget an alleged conservative peer who is a tax dogger continue to make a large donations to the Conservative Party, what a lark. As usual austerity remains the mantra of the day or more of the same backstabbing shows its ugly face by the ranks of the backbenchers to sort out who will push the knife into Ice Queen( Theresa May).

So if people are honest and do work or care for others bring all the correct paperwork and documents they don’t get Universal Credit in 6 weeks if they are lucky if it’s 6 months from what I am getting to hear from close friends and others
This government is employing the Department Works and Pension to punish people and people are being made ill and will die. Like many people we did not did not vote for this and I doubt anyone else did. Poor people on low or no income will get into debt and despair.

It’s been alleged by the Resolution Foundation the loss of income due to benefit freezes would be in the sum of two hundred and twenty five pounds for a single parent in work and the chancellor of the exchequer should ease the squeeze on benefit household. Benefit freezes combined with the predictable raise in inflation could set some low-income households back three hundred pounds next year.

This smells of 1992- 1997 of the Conservative infighting and we all could see what happened then it was well come back to Labour all is forgiven in the guise of a spider called New Labour but on this occasion it will be in the form of “Oh Jeremy Corbyn Labour Government”. Oh where, oh where is Jess Phillips and others when we all need their loud gobs to crake the whip at the conservatives by shouting out “ Another one bites the dust”. Or even better throwing some rotten eggs at Theresa May come what may.

Our NHS is in a major crisis, as is social  services, ask anyone who works on the frontline and any patients waiting for treatment, or waiting to be transferred from hospital. Many hospitals have already stopped elective surgery to cope with the winter crisis, remember last year the humanitarian one declared by the Red Cross.

Even although their own NHS England chief has highly criticised them on lack of sufficient funding, the Chancellor has pledged £2.8billion for the health service in England, but only £350million of that will be available to hospitals this year!
Our NHS will get just £1.6billion extra in 2018/19 which is actually less than half the extra £4billion health chiefs have said is desperately needed.

Truth is as it was revealed earlier this month, sorry forgot where I read it,   that the UK is ‘suffering a significant drop in growth and productivity is stagnant, decimating tax receipts and government spending plans.’
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) stated that productivity   may have never recovered from the recession.

This in itself surely demonstrates the failure of Tory economic policy. Despite all those austerity measures where we all dutifully tightened our belts, with punitive pay caps and sanctions being enforced etc what has happened?

The debt is bigger than ever and our NHS, social services, welfare state and education etc all key drivers of economic recovery as they are investing in the people, are being made to fail.
It will be interesting to see what happens over the next year with the Brexit debacle thrown in the mix but for many I fear it will be a disaster, especially for our most vulnerable citizens.

Anger over Tory MP brexit hit list A Eurosceptic Tory MP has landed himself in hot water by writing compiling a hit list of university professors who teach Brexit subjects. It’s no surprise he received a fury reaction from the letter

According to Theresa May she has written to all EU citizens who resides in the UK here is a sample of the letter:

Prime Minister’s Office
Ahead of EU Council, Theresa May wrote directly to EU citizens in the UK.

As I travel to Brussels today, I know that many people will be looking to us – the leaders of the 28 nations in the European Union – to demonstrate we are putting people first.

I have been clear throughout this process that citizens’ rights are my first priority. And I know my fellow leaders have the same objective: to safeguard the rights of EU nationals living in the UK and UK nationals living in the EU. I want to give reassurance that this issue remains a priority, that we are united on the key principles, and that the focus over the weeks to come will be delivering an agreement that works for people here in the UK, and people in the EU.

When we started this process, some accused us of treating EU nationals as bargaining chips. Nothing could have been further from the truth. EU citizens who have made their lives in the UK have made a huge contribution to our country. And we want them and their families to stay. I couldn’t be clearer: EU citizens living lawfully in the UK today will be able to stay.

But this agreement will not only provide certainty about residence, but also healthcare, pensions and other benefits. It will mean that EU citizens who have paid into the UK system – and UK nationals into the system of an EU27 country – can benefit from what they’ve put in. It will enable families who have built their lives together in the EU and UK to stay together. And it will provide guarantees that the rights of those UK nationals currently living in the EU, and EU citizens currently living in the UK, will not diverge over time.

What that leaves us with is a small number of important points to finalise. That is to be expected at this point in negotiations. We are in touching distance of agreement. I know both sides will consider each other’s proposals for finalising the agreement with an open mind. And with flexibility and creativity on both sides, I am confident that we can conclude discussions on citizens’ rights in the coming weeks.

I know there is real anxiety about how the agreement will be implemented. People are concerned that the process will be complicated and bureaucratic, and will put up hurdles that are difficult to overcome. I want to provide reassurance here too.

We are developing a streamlined digital process for those applying for settled status in the UK in the future. This process will be designed with users in mind, and we will engage with them every step of the way. We will keep the cost as low as possible – no more than the cost of a UK passport. The criteria applied will be simple, transparent and strictly in accordance with the Withdrawal Agreement.

People applying will not have to account for every trip they have taken in and out of the UK and will no longer have to demonstrate Comprehensive Sickness Insurance as they currently have to under EU rules. And importantly, for any EU citizen who holds Permanent Residence under the old scheme, there will be a simple process put in place to swap their current status for UK settled status.

To keep development of the system on track, the government is also setting up a User Group that will include representatives of EU citizens in the UK, and digital, technical and legal experts. This group will meet regularly, ensuring the process is transparent and responds properly to users’ needs. And we recognise that British nationals living in the EU27 will be similarly concerned about potential changes to processes after the UK leaves the EU. We have repeatedly flagged these issues during the negotiations. And we are keen to work closely with EU member states to ensure their processes are equally streamlined.

We want people to stay and we want families to stay together. We hugely value the contributions that EU nationals make to the economic, social and cultural fabric of the UK. And I know that member states value equally UK nationals living in their communities. I hope that these reassurances, alongside those made by both the UK and the European Commission last week, will provide further helpful certainty to the four million people who were understandably anxious about what Brexit would mean for their futures.

If you still want to be kicked between the legs by the Conservatives continue to vote Tories in the Local Government Elections 2018, if you want hope for a better future vote Labour to make a big difference in your ward.

Satire: Tories are in trouble again

Here is something to remember about Ice Queen May see youtube:

I have to say that the media have been very biased towards Jeremy Corbyn over the past three years he has received more than his share of bashing, but when it comes to subject such as Brexit it is alleged he is very vague I would beg to differ this is on the grounds of when Labour tries to put their message across to the press, the press who are the Tories friends will put a different spin on it which will put a damper on it which is why Ice Queen has gotten away with murder. A lot of people fear the various spin on Brexit which may bankrupt the country and you don’t have to be brainwashed by any media to feel this way. What a fracking joke, hey mates wake up and smell the very strong coffee the table has just turned on Theresa May for a change. Who remembers the Tories promise that they will be the party that will cap care home fees 2020.  Well it’s no surprise that Tories ditch plan to cap care home fees by 2020. An absolute disgrace, this means, in essence, anyone needing care could unless extremely wealthy, lose their home; they struggled for years to buy. This must be opposed, enough is enough.

Cough, cough, cough, cough, cough oh why, oh why did a spider called Jeremy Corbyn came along to disrupt Theresa May by handing Ice Queen May her P45 whilst she was in full flow of her speech Jeremy Corbyn claimed that this P45 was from Boris Johnson. He turn to Boris I have given the P45 to Theresa. The speech was to relaunch her career and assert her authority as leader. Indeed, it was a disaster, and Theresa May, maybe gone within days or months. She started to cough her way through a set of weak, rehashed policies which was cherry picked of Labour policies and in Labour manifesto some by Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn. Strangely some of letters in the empty slogan behind her peeled off and fell to the floor.  In her conference speech the Prime Minister proposed to take just a few of our policies and heavily watering them down. That won’t work.

Check out this from youtube from a man that is very much liked

This will not come as a surprise to us remember two of Labour manifesto commitments to cap energy prices and build more council housing it transpires the conservatives were trying to outdo Labour by adopting labour policies have the Conservatives become the party for desperation to get social policies on their agenda that they end up announcing more u-turns by adopting Labour policies when it suits them Whilst I’m very happy for the conservatives adopting Labour policies at their conference at least give Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn the credit where its due instead of claiming it’s a conservative policy, I’m sure people will remember Trade Union Congress and Labour’s Living Wage policy only for the Conservative to claim it was their policy.

The Tory plan to roll out universal credit across the country may be a good idea in principal and in theory. However if I was a teacher and I had to mark it out of ten I would give five out of ten. I would consider the timing of it to ascertain whether it was wrong as one side does not fit all to individuals each case should be on merits not all individuals can budget on a monthly base. The idea that workers gets paid on a monthly bases is great the government seemed to forgot that there workers that receive their pay on a weekly bases as well. I foresaw the former coalition government wanted the universal credit implemented forthwith which was ill-judged and cruel for this reason I will deduct five points for causing misery to many people who are on benefits and low pay workers depends on benefits to help them out with child care and have to wait up to six weeks to receive their payment as an average worker only waits for four weeks to receive their salary. Councils and housing associations are braced for a surge in rent arrears and evictions as the introduction of the dreaded Universal Credit come into force. See the link below:


Now folks here is the burning question who do you think will take over the leadership of the Conservatives and hold a General Elections. If they are not ready then move aside and let a Labour Government run the country.







My thoughts after Labour Conference came to end

Parliamentarians returned to parliament after the recess period only for party conference to take place from all the political parties to determine policies from party members which social policies they want to vote on or reject in the hope it will appear in the next Local Government and National manifestos or take a position on which will help influence our voters with their choice of political party which represents their views for the local government elections in 2018 and 2020 general elections. Don’t forget that all manifestos comes out nearer the time when the general, local elections are called by the government.
There were some good speakers and some of the speakers that stuck my mind is no doubt one of the speaker who spoke on homelessness and the affects it has on them, she highlighted some of the root causes and what she witnessed and the other speaker spoke of disabilities on how it affects the daily routine and urge conference to support disability awareness both speakers hit a raw nerve to delegates both of them were in my opinion were speaking about their experience and first time delegates.
No doubt there will be delegates and visitors that will be charge from #Lab17 and will be motivated to get the vote out for Labour. Campaigning is all year round and not just during election times as seasoned party members will inform us all, which true campaigning is all year round and not just during election times. Labour members will have to redouble their efforts to turn all the wards around from Blue,(Conservative) Yellow,(Fibdems oh I mean Libdems) and purple and yellow(UKIP) all to Red( Labour) across the nation I kid you not. Now is the time to do your bit for our party by getting active as soon as possible by knocking on every door leaving no stones unturned.
Just some of the highlights of Labour Conference which made my day and I include the YouTube which made progress and gained momentum during the course of conference which made it even more exciting starting with Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell and followed by Tom Watson.

Jeremy Corbyn Conference Speech 2017 via youtube:


John McDonnell Conference Speech 2017 via youtube:


Tom Watson Conference Speech 2017 via youtube:

They all have a message to all voters of all classes of race and creed, and no matter what your background labour is showing the way why you should vote Labour in all the elections all year round. To those who still have doubts in Labour I will be the first to acknowledge that Labour did not win the general elections 2017 and Labour activists have a lot of hard work to convince voters why labour is the party in waiting to be the next government. I’m sure the press will be siding with the conservatives by stating that Labour is going back to the 1970s -1980s they seem to be remembering the Kinnock years when he was over confident which cost him the general elections. Somehow they seem to overlook the eighteen years of underfunding of public services, attacks on cold miners, the riots that took place across the UK, and deaths in police custody just to name a few. I urge voters to remember that it was the Labour Party that cut the majority of the conservatives and in return they had to depend on the Democratic Union Party(DUP) for a confidence and supply agreement vote which it is placed on public record. Look at the conservatives record on u-turns they have made when they were in office only for some of Labour policies to be adopted by the government, heck they were willing to drop their own manifesto just implement our policies such as lifting the one percent pay cap, rent cap, living wage, energy cap etc.

It looks like Labour has done it again by having #Maybot on the hop during her visit Florence by reminding her that she either buckle up or move aside for a Labour government in waiting and this was her life saving response:

It’s good to be here in this great city of Florence today at a critical time in the evolution of the relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union.

It was here, more than anywhere else, that the Renaissance began – a period of history that inspired centuries of creativity and critical thought across our continent and which in many ways defined what it meant to be European.

A period of history whose example shaped the modern world. A period of history that teaches us that when we come together in a spirit of ambition and innovation, we have it within ourselves to do great things.

That shows us that if we open our minds to new thinking and new possibilities, we can forge a better, brighter future for all our peoples.

And that is what I want to focus on today. For we are moving through a new and critical period in the history of the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union.

The British people have decided to leave the EU; and to be a global, free-trading nation, able to chart our own way in the world.

For many, this is an exciting time, full of promise; for others it is a worrying one.

I look ahead with optimism, believing that if we use this moment to change not just our relationship with Europe, but also the way we do things at home, this will be a defining moment in the history of our nation.

And it is an exciting time for many in Europe too. The European Union is beginning a new chapter in the story of its development. Just last week, President Juncker set out his ambitions for the future of the European Union.

There is a vibrant debate going on about the shape of the EU’s institutions and the direction of the Union in the years ahead. We don’t want to stand in the way of that.

Indeed, we want to be your strongest friend and partner as the EU, and the UK thrive side by side.

Shared challenges

And that partnership is important. For as we look ahead, we see shared challenges and opportunities in common.

Here in Italy today, our two countries are working together to tackle some of the greatest challenges of our time; challenges where all too often geography has put Italy on the frontline.

As I speak, Britain’s Royal Navy, National Crime Agency and Border Force are working alongside their Italian partners to save lives in the Mediterranean and crack down on the evil traffickers who are exploiting desperate men, women and children who seek a better life.

Our two countries are also working together in the fight against terrorism – from our positions at the forefront of the international coalition against Daesh to our work to disrupt the networks terrorist groups use to finance their operations and recruit to their ranks.

And earlier this week, I was delighted that Prime Minister Gentiloni was able to join President Macron and myself in convening the first ever UN summit of government and industry to move further and faster in preventing terrorist use of the Internet.

Mass migration and terrorism are but two examples of the challenges to our shared European interests and values that we can only solve in partnership.

The weakening growth of global trade; the loss of popular support for the forces of liberalism and free trade that is driving moves towards protectionism; the threat of climate change depleting and degrading the planet we leave for future generations; and most recently, the outrageous proliferation of nuclear weapons by North Korea with a threat to use them.

Here on our own continent, we see territorial aggression to the east; and from the South threats from instability and civil war; terrorism, crime and other challenges which respect no borders.

The only way for us to respond to this vast array of challenges is for likeminded nations and peoples to come together and defend the international order that we have worked so hard to create – and the values of liberty, democracy, human rights and the rule of law by which we stand.

Britain has always – and will always – stand with its friends and allies in defence of these values.

Our decision to leave the European Union is in no way a repudiation of this longstanding commitment. We may be leaving the European Union, but we are not leaving Europe.

Our resolve to draw on the full weight of our military, intelligence, diplomatic and development resources to lead international action, with our partners, on the issues that affect the security and prosperity of our peoples is unchanged.

Our commitment to the defence – and indeed the advance – of our shared values is undimmed.

Our determination to defend the stability, security and prosperity of our European neighbours and friends remains steadfast.

The decision of the British people

And we will do all this as a sovereign nation in which the British people are in control.

Their decision to leave the institution of the European Union was an expression of that desire – a statement about how they want their democracy to work.

They want more direct control of decisions that affect their daily lives; and that means those decisions being made in Britain by people directly accountable to them.

The strength of feeling that the British people have about this need for control and the direct accountability of their politicians is one reason why, throughout its membership, the United Kingdom has never totally felt at home being in the European Union.

And perhaps because of our history and geography, the European Union never felt to us like an integral part of our national story in the way it does to so many elsewhere in Europe.

It is a matter of choices. The profound pooling of sovereignty that is a crucial feature of the European Union permits unprecedentedly deep cooperation, which brings benefits.

But it also means that when countries are in the minority they must sometimes accept decisions they do not want, even affecting domestic matters with no market implications beyond their borders. And when such decisions are taken, they can be very hard to change.

So the British electorate made a choice. They chose the power of domestic democratic control over pooling that control, strengthening the role of the UK Parliament and the devolved Scottish Parliament, Welsh and Northern Ireland Assemblies in deciding our laws.

That is our choice. It does not mean we are no longer a proud member of the family of European nations. And it does not mean we are turning our back on Europe; or worse that we do not wish the EU to succeed. The success of the EU is profoundly in our national interest and that of the wider world.

But having made this choice, the question now is whether we – the leaders of Britain, and of the EU’s Member States and institutions – can demonstrate that creativity, that innovation, that ambition that we need to shape a new partnership to the benefit of all our people.

I believe we must. And I believe we can.

For while the UK’s departure from the EU is inevitably a difficult process, it is in all of our interests for our negotiations to succeed. If we were to fail, or be divided, the only beneficiaries would be those who reject our values and oppose our interests.

So I believe we share a profound sense of responsibility to make this change work smoothly and sensibly, not just for people today but for the next generation who will inherit the world we leave them.

The eyes of the world are on us, but if we can be imaginative and creative about the way we establish this new relationship, if we can proceed on the basis of trust in each other, I believe we can be optimistic about the future we can build for the United Kingdom and for the European Union.


In my speech at Lancaster House earlier this year, I set out the UK’s negotiating objectives.

Those still stand today. Since that speech and the triggering of Article 50 in March, the UK has published 14 papers to address the current issues in the talks and set out the building blocks of the relationship we would like to see with the EU, both as we leave, and into the future.

We have now conducted three rounds of negotiations. And while, at times, these negotiations have been tough, it is clear that, thanks to the professionalism and diligence of David Davis and Michel Barnier, we have made concrete progress on many important issues.

For example, we have recognised from the outset there are unique issues to consider when it comes to Northern Ireland.

The UK government, the Irish government and the EU as a whole have been clear that through the process of our withdrawal we will protect progress made in Northern Ireland over recent years – and the lives and livelihoods that depend on this progress.

As part of this, we and the EU have committed to protecting the Belfast Agreement and the Common Travel Area and, looking ahead, we have both stated explicitly that we will not accept any physical infrastructure at the border.

We owe it to the people of Northern Ireland – and indeed to everyone on the island of Ireland – to see through these commitments.

We have also made significant progress on how we look after European nationals living in the UK and British nationals living in the 27 Member States of the EU.

I know this whole process has been a cause of great worry and anxiety for them and their loved ones.

But I want to repeat to the 600,000 Italians in the UK – and indeed to all EU citizens who have made their lives in our country – that we want you to stay; we value you; and we thank you for your contribution to our national life – and it has been, and remains, one of my first goals in this negotiation to ensure that you can carry on living your lives as before.

I am clear that the guarantee I am giving on your rights is real. And I doubt anyone with real experience of the UK would doubt the independence of our courts or of the rigour with which they will uphold people’s legal rights.

But I know there are concerns that over time the rights of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens overseas will diverge. I want to incorporate our agreement fully into UK law and make sure the UK courts can refer directly to it.

Where there is uncertainty around underlying EU law, I want the UK courts to be able to take into account the judgments of the European Court of Justice with a view to ensuring consistent interpretation. On this basis, I hope our teams can reach firm agreement quickly.

Shared future

At the moment, the negotiations are focused on the arrangements for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. But we need to move on to talk about our future relationship.

Of course, we recognise that we can’t leave the EU and have everything stay the same. Life for us will be different.

But what we do want – and what we hope that you, our European friends, want too – is to stay as partners who carry on working together for our mutual benefit.

In short, we want to work hand in hand with the European Union, rather than as part of the European Union.

That is why in my speech at Lancaster House I said that the United Kingdom would seek to secure a new, deep and special partnership with the European Union.

And this should span both a new economic relationship and a new relationship on security.

So let me set out what each of these relationships could look like – before turning to the question of how we get there.

Economic partnership

Let me start with the economic partnership.

The United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. We will no longer be members of its single market or its customs union. For we understand that the single market’s four freedoms are indivisible for our European friends.

We recognise that the single market is built on a balance of rights and obligations. And we do not pretend that you can have all the benefits of membership of the single market without its obligations.

So our task is to find a new framework that allows for a close economic partnership but holds those rights and obligations in a new and different balance.

But as we work out together how to do so, we do not start with a blank sheet of paper, like other external partners negotiating a free trade deal from scratch have done.

In fact, we start from an unprecedented position. For we have the same rules and regulations as the EU – and our EU Withdrawal Bill will ensure they are carried over into our domestic law at the moment we leave the EU.

So the question for us now in building a new economic partnership is not how we bring our rules and regulations closer together, but what we do when one of us wants to make changes.

One way of approaching this question is to put forward a stark and unimaginative choice between two models: either something based on European Economic Area membership; or a traditional Free Trade Agreement, such as that the EU has recently negotiated with Canada.

I don’t believe either of these options would be best for the UK or best for the European Union.

European Economic Area membership would mean the UK having to adopt at home – automatically and in their entirety – new EU rules. Rules over which, in future, we will have little influence and no vote.

Such a loss of democratic control could not work for the British people. I fear it would inevitably lead to friction and then a damaging re-opening of the nature of our relationship in the near future: the very last thing that anyone on either side of the Channel wants.

As for a Canadian style free trade agreement, we should recognise that this is the most advanced free trade agreement the EU has yet concluded and a breakthrough in trade between Canada and the EU.

But compared with what exists between Britain and the EU today, it would nevertheless represent such a restriction on our mutual market access that it would benefit neither of our economies.

Not only that, it would start from the false premise that there is no pre-existing regulatory relationship between us. And precedent suggests that it could take years to negotiate.

We can do so much better than this.

As I said at Lancaster House, let us not seek merely to adopt a model already enjoyed by other countries. Instead let us be creative as well as practical in designing an ambitious economic partnership which respects the freedoms and principles of the EU, and the wishes of the British people.

I believe there are good reasons for this level of optimism and ambition.

First of all, the UK is the EU’s largest trading partner, one of the largest economies in the world, and a market of considerable importance for many businesses and jobs across the continent. And the EU is our largest trading partner, so it is in all our interests to find a creative solution.

The European Union has shown in the past that creative arrangements can be agreed in other areas. For example, it has developed a diverse array of arrangements with neighbouring countries outside the EU, both in economic relations and in justice and home affairs.

Furthermore, we share the same set of fundamental beliefs; a belief in free trade, rigorous and fair competition, strong consumer rights, and that trying to beat other countries’ industries by unfairly subsidising one’s own is a serious mistake.

So there is no need to impose tariffs where we have none now, and I don’t think anyone sensible is contemplating this.

And as we have set out in a future partnership paper, when it comes to trade in goods, we will do everything we can to avoid friction at the border. But of course the regulatory issues are crucial.

We share a commitment to high regulatory standards.

People in Britain do not want shoddy goods, shoddy services, a poor environment or exploitative working practices and I can never imagine them thinking those things to be acceptable.

The government I lead is committed not only to protecting high standards, but strengthening them.

So I am optimistic about what we can achieve by finding a creative solution to a new economic relationship that can support prosperity for all our peoples.

Now in any trading relationship, both sides have to agree on a set of rules which govern how each side behaves.

So we will need to discuss with our European partners new ways of managing our interdependence and our differences, in the context of our shared values.

There will be areas of policy and regulation which are outside the scope of our trade and economic relations where this should be straightforward.

There will be areas which do affect our economic relations where we and our European friends may have different goals; or where we share the same goals but want to achieve them through different means.

And there will be areas where we want to achieve the same goals in the same ways, because it makes sense for our economies.

And because rights and obligations must be held in balance, the decisions we both take will have consequences for the UK’s access to European markets and vice versa.

To make this partnership work, because disagreements inevitably arise, we will need a strong and appropriate dispute resolution mechanism.

It is, of course, vital that any agreement reached – its specific terms and the principles on which it is based – are interpreted in the same way by the European Union and the United Kingdom and we want to discuss how we do that.

This could not mean the European Court of Justice – or indeed UK courts – being the arbiter of disputes about the implementation of the agreement between the UK and the EU however.

It wouldn’t be right for one party’s court to have jurisdiction over the other. But I am confident we can find an appropriate mechanism for resolving disputes.

So this new economic partnership, would be comprehensive and ambitious. It would be underpinned by high standards, and a practical approach to regulation that enables us to continue to work together in bringing shared prosperity to our peoples for generations to come.

Security relationship

Let me turn to the new security relationship that we want to see.

To keep our people safe and to secure our values and interests, I believe it is essential that, although the UK is leaving the EU, the quality of our cooperation on security is maintained.

We believe we should be as open-minded as possible about how we continue to work together on what can be life and death matters.

Our security co-operation is not just vital because our people face the same threats, but also because we share a deep, historic belief in the same values – the values of peace, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Of course, there is no pre-existing model for co-operation between the EU and external partners which replicates the full scale and depth of the collaboration that currently exists between the EU and the UK on security, law enforcement and criminal justice.

But as the threats we face evolve faster than ever, I believe it is vital that we work together to design new, dynamic arrangements that go beyond the existing arrangements that the EU has in this area – and draw on the legal models the EU has previously used to structure co-operation with external partners in other fields such as trade.

So we are proposing a bold new strategic agreement that provides a comprehensive framework for future security, law enforcement and criminal justice co-operation: a treaty between the UK and the EU.

This would complement the extensive and mature bi-lateral relationships that we already have with European friends to promote our common security.

Our ambition would be to build a model that is underpinned by our shared principles, including high standards of data protection and human rights.

It would be kept sufficiently versatile and dynamic to respond to the ever-evolving threats that we face. And it would create an ongoing dialogue in which law enforcement and criminal justice priorities can be shared and – where appropriate – tackled jointly.

We are also proposing a far reaching partnership on how we protect Europe together from the threats we face in the world today; how we work together to promote our shared values and interests abroad; whether security, spreading the rule of law, dealing with emerging threats, handling the migration crisis or helping countries out of poverty.

The United Kingdom has outstanding capabilities. We have the biggest defence budget in Europe, and one of the largest development budgets in the world. We have a far-reaching diplomatic network, and world class security, intelligence and law enforcement services.

So what we are offering will be unprecedented in its breadth, taking in cooperation on diplomacy, defence and security, and development.

And it will be unprecedented in its depth, in terms of the degree of engagement that we would aim to deliver.

It is our ambition to work as closely as possible together with the EU, protecting our people, promoting our values and ensuring the future security of our continent.

The United Kingdom is unconditionally committed to maintaining Europe’s security. And the UK will continue to offer aid and assistance to EU member states that are the victims of armed aggression, terrorism and natural or manmade disasters.

Taken as a whole, this bold new security partnership will not only reflect our history and the practical benefits of co-operation in tackling shared threats, but also demonstrate the UK’s genuine commitment to promoting our shared values across the world and to maintaining a secure and prosperous Europe.


That is the partnership I want Britain and the European Union to have in the future.

None of its goals should be controversial. Everything I have said is about creating a long-term relationship through which the nations of the European Union and the United Kingdom can work together for the mutual benefit of all our people.

If we adopt this vision of a deep and special partnership, the question is then how we get there: how we build a bridge from where we are now to where we want to be.

The United Kingdom will cease to be a member of the European Union on 29th March 2019.

We will no longer sit at the European Council table or in the Council of Ministers, and we will no longer have Members of the European Parliament.

Our relations with countries outside the EU can be developed in new ways, including through our own trade negotiations, because we will no longer be an EU country, and we will no longer directly benefit from the EU’s future trade negotiations.

But the fact is that, at that point, neither the UK – nor the EU and its Members States – will be in a position to implement smoothly many of the detailed arrangements that will underpin this new relationship we seek.

Neither is the European Union legally able to conclude an agreement with the UK as an external partner while it is itself still part of the European Union.

And such an agreement on the future partnership will require the appropriate legal ratification, which would take time.

It is also the case that people and businesses – both in the UK and in the EU – would benefit from a period to adjust to the new arrangements in a smooth and orderly way.

As I said in my speech at Lancaster House a period of implementation would be in our mutual interest. That is why I am proposing that there should be such a period after the UK leaves the EU.

Clearly people, businesses and public services should only have to plan for one set of changes in the relationship between the UK and the EU.

So during the implementation period access to one another’s markets should continue on current terms and Britain also should continue to take part in existing security measures. And I know businesses, in particular, would welcome the certainty this would provide.

The framework for this strictly time-limited period, which can be agreed under Article 50, would be the existing structure of EU rules and regulations.

How long the period is should be determined simply by how long it will take to prepare and implement the new processes and new systems that will underpin that future partnership.

For example, it will take time to put in place the new immigration system required to re-take control of the UK’s borders.

So during the implementation period, people will continue to be able to come and live and work in the UK; but there will be a registration system – an essential preparation for the new regime.

As of today, these considerations point to an implementation period of around two years.

But because I don’t believe that either the EU or the British people will want the UK to stay longer in the existing structures than is necessary, we could also agree to bring forward aspects of that future framework such as new dispute resolution mechanisms more quickly if this can be done smoothly.

It is clear that what would be most helpful to people and businesses on both sides, who want this process to be smooth and orderly, is for us to agree the detailed arrangements for this implementation period as early as possible. Although we recognise that the EU institutions will need to adopt a formal position.

And at the heart of these arrangements, there should be a clear double lock: a guarantee that there will be a period of implementation giving businesses and people alike the certainty that they will be able to prepare for the change; and a guarantee that this implementation period will be time-limited, giving everyone the certainty that this will not go on for ever.

These arrangements will create valuable certainty.

But in this context I am conscious that our departure causes another type of uncertainty for the remaining member states and their taxpayers over the EU budget.

Some of the claims made on this issue are exaggerated and unhelpful and we can only resolve this as part of the settlement of all the issues I have been talking about today.

Still I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave. The UK will honour commitments we have made during the period of our membership.

And as we move forwards, we will also want to continue working together in ways that promote the long-term economic development of our continent.

This includes continuing to take part in those specific policies and programmes which are greatly to the UK and the EU’s joint advantage, such as those that promote science, education and culture – and those that promote our mutual security.

And as I set out in my speech at Lancaster House, in doing so, we would want to make an ongoing contribution to cover our fair share of the costs involved.


When I gave my speech at the beginning of this year I spoke not just about the preparations we were making for a successful negotiation but also about our preparations for our life outside the European Union – with or without what I hope will be a successful deal.

And the necessary work continues on all these fronts so that we are able to meet any eventual outcome.

But as we meet here today, in this city of creativity and rebirth, let us open our minds to the possible.

To a new era of cooperation and partnership between the United Kingdom and the European Union. And to a stronger, fairer, more prosperous future for us all.

For that is the prize if we get this negotiation right.

A sovereign United Kingdom and a confident European Union, both free to chart their own course.

A new partnership of values and interests.

A new alliance that can stand strongly together in the world.

That is the goal towards which we must work in the months ahead as the relationship between Britain and Europe evolves.

However it does so, I am clear that Britain’s future is bright.

Our fundamentals are strong: a legal system respected around the world; a keen openness to foreign investment; an enthusiasm for innovation; an ease of doing business; some of the best universities and researchers you can find anywhere; an exceptional national talent for creativity and an indomitable spirit.

It is our fundamental strengths that really determine a country’s success and that is why Britain’s economy will always be strong.

There are other reasons why our future should give us confidence. We will always be a champion of economic openness; we will always be a country whose pitch to the world is high standards at home.

When we differ from the EU in our regulatory choices, it won’t be to try and attain an unfair competitive advantage, it will be because we want rules that are right for Britain’s particular situation.

The best way for us both to succeed is to fulfil the potential of the partnership I have set out today.

For we should be in no doubt, that if our collective endeavours in these negotiations were to prove insufficient to reach an agreement, it would be a failure in the eyes of history and a damaging blow to the future of our continent.

Indeed, I believe the difference between where we would all be if we fail – and where we could be if we can achieve the kind of new partnership I have set out today – to be so great that it is beholden on all of us involved to demonstrate the leadership and flexibility needed to ensure that we succeed.

Yes, the negotiations to get there will be difficult. But if we approach them in the right way – respectful of the challenges for both sides and pragmatic about resolving them – we can find a way forward that makes a success of this for all of our peoples.

I recognise that this is not something that you – our European partners – wanted to do. It is a distraction from what you want to get on with. But we have to get this right.

And we both want to get this done as swiftly as possible.

So it is up to leaders to set the tone.

And the tone I want to set is one of partnership and friendship.

A tone of trust, the cornerstone of any relationship.

For if we get the spirit of this negotiation right; if we get the spirit of this partnership right, then at the end of this process we will find that we are able to resolve the issues where we disagree respectfully and quickly.

And if we can do that, then when this chapter of our European history is written, it will be remembered not for the differences we faced but for the vision we showed; not for the challenges we endured but for the creativity we used to overcome them; not for a relationship that ended but a new partnership that began.

A partnership of interests, a partnership of values; a partnership of ambition for a shared future: the UK and the EU side by side delivering prosperity and opportunity for all our people.

This is the future within our grasp – so, together, let us seize it.

I have a funny feeling that there will be a change of leadership of the conservatives very soon so what this space.

Run,Madam May run, run, run away

Its about time that Theresa may take notice and do the nation a very big favor continue to run away.

Firstly, well done to Lewis Hamiltion for coming first place and took outright championship lead in the Italian Grand Prix for the first time in this season on Sunday 3 September 2017 with a four point lead and I wish him all the best for Hamiltion in the Singapore Grand Prix on 15 – 17 September. Now that I got this out of the way down to more serious business of the day.
Police morale is at a all time low among three in every five police officers. The Police Federation poll shown the treatment of the pay service as a whole pay and work life balance were having the biggest impact on morle. The proportion of officers planning to leave the service within two years was up from 11.8% last year to 12.3%. To top it off policing in England and Wales is facing a shortage of staff and raising crime. Policing services are based on fewer people working more hours and days. All the Home office can say in their defence policing offered competitive pay and a good pension. So in a nutshell take what you get from abusive public and get on with your job or else face the sack.
To be very frank, I whole heartily support the call from the NHS for a  bail out unless it is properly funded the service will be the worst winter in recent history if it does not receive an emergency bailout. The cash is needed to pay for extra staff and beds on the grounds of extra attempts to improve finances have failed. The conservative government has given councils an extra one billon pounds for social care strives to help relieve the pressure on hospitals. The feeble response from the Department of Health the “NHS has prepared for winter more this year than ever before” is unacceptable in my opinion as it is opening the floodgate of backdoor deals to privatisation on a large scale so be warned.
There comes a time to say enough is enough to Jeremy Hunt and a hat tip to Stephen Hawkings for speaking out against privatisation of our NHS. Keep Public Service public which side are you on. See article below:
Well we all guessed what the reply from Jeremy Hunt would be and I would not expect anything else from the toffee nose which goes like this Jeremy Hunt has accused Stephen Hawking of a “pernicious” lie after the physicist said it seemed the Tories were steering the UK towards a US-style health insurance system. See article below:

What a jerk Theresa May has become on the one hand she is trying to woo the working class by enticing them with left wing policies to make a convincing argument to gain our trust then using right wing arguments to win over natural conservatives its no wonder why she is under pressure from her backbenchers and she is doing what she can to keep her position and at the same time keeping her backbenchers at bay to maintain control of the Conservatives. Hence her speech in Japan she wants to stay as leader and Prime Minister into the next general elections. During her leadership for the conservative party in October 2016 she said that directors must be held to account and be transparent with their pay and under her leadership they will have to change alas this is not to be a sad day indeed. Sunday 27 August 2017 Theresa May took to the Sunday mail to write a hasty article by stating business who pay excessive salaries to senior executives represent the “unacceptable face of capitalism”. The “excesses” of some bosses was undermining confidence the social fabric of our country”. Firms should that face revolts over salaries and bonuses will be named on a new public register. If she thinks it will win over the minds of working class its no wonder that all the trade unions said it was feeble.
The nation is aware of a police are purportedly investigating the claims of a call centre in Neath to canvassing voters during the General Elections 2017 campaign. It’s no surprise the Tories quoting they don’t comment on a on going investigations.
Can anybody imagine United Kingdom divided over partition take for instance Pakistan, India, Bangladesh or Hong King are some clear examples which was part of British empire and dare I say it British imperialism. Whilst I acknowledge independence is important, there are nations are ruled by dictators and it’s citizens are monitored by the government. Citizens should not be afraid of its government but the governments should be afraid of its people. Governments continue to make promises and voters has to be reminded that a promise is a comfort to a fool.
It’s alleged that net migration has fallen to the lowest level for three years after a surge in the number in the number of EU nationals leaving the UK since June  Brexit vote. The net migration the difference between those entering and leaving the UK fell 81,000 to 246,000 in the year to march 2017. More than half that change is due to a decrease in net migration of EU citizens which is down 51,000.
High five and hat tip to Micheal Barnier the EU chief negotiator has raised concerns about the progress of UK Brexit negotiations. It’s just not good enough for Theresa May to appeal for unity from pro-EU conservative MPs as Commons is set to debate the government Brexit repeal bill. The bill seen as key plank of the government Brexit policy transfers EU law into UK legislation there will be proper scrutiny but some MPs fear it will give ministers sweeping new powers
I’m very glad of labour position of considering keeping the UK in the EU single market and customs union for a transitional period after leaving the EU. I’m even more intrigued by four articles by two Labour MPs and a Labour MEP see articles below:




My message to Theresa May on her return to Parliament is continue to run around like a headless chicken and do continue to run, madam Theresa May run so a Labour government can get on with the job for the many and not for the few in the interest of our nation.

My Thoughts on the Repeal Bill

Here is something that we should remember:

Who gives a flying monkeys about the outcome of European Union which has divided this nation of ours on political ideology. To those who continued not vote will always say they are all in each other’s pockets and they are the same and will continue to do more of the same. Or they seem to have this notion of a conspiracy theory no matter what you say to them. It’s only when people start to lose some benefits that they enjoy or the government starts to take some form of action that affects people who some thing has to give before people starts to come out to vote to change the system.
Staggering how many Brexit supporters have no basis for their arguments. When faced with facts they reply with a belief? Yet cannot say what it is that makes them believe. All European Nations can control their borders already, if they chose to do so. If a person has no money or job and has not succeeded in finding work they can if enforced be told to leave the nation. Yet in the UK we do not operate that EU law because the cost of deporting people would be high as you would need to invest in greater numbers of officers and admin to ensure happens.
Yet the argument that leaving the EU will take back control of borders is bogus, one because the EU law shows the EU nations already have ability to do just that. Two because leaving will not end migration and most of which comes from outside the EU, but because we need people to fill jobs in the economy.
Brexit was based on a dislike of foreign people, it’s no good pretending it was not because if that was not the case Brexiteers would be able to offer a principle case for their reason. Yes some will hate Europe for other reasons, but when faced with reality immigration was used by the Leave camp during the referendum as the driving issue, for everything else they called any concerns as project fear.
Well as stated then there was no project fear just reality. We have the worst performing economy out of the whole EU since the Referendum and it’s getting worse. At some point the penny will drop because Brexit is not going to happen. Regardless what May say the reality will take hold that there is no positives to leaving.
Not long now before Brexit becomes too hot for the Government or any political party that thinks it can ignore the real will of the people. In addition to this poll 54% want Brexit stopped and that is a far higher than the 37% who voted to leave. Brexit was never right, it was un-British and undemocratic in how the Referendum was run. Lies, distorted facts, the use of Twitter Bots to create fake accounts, trolling and deception was rife by the leave side. There was no balance and nobody was asking the real questions on what was causing the anger. Europe means values, shared culture and history, working and human rights, environmental law, animal welfare protection, joint operations to tackle international crime and terrorism, jobs, trade and a strength for the UK though its biggest export, influence. The fraction it cost is paid back many times and we all benefit from being part of something bigger. Free movement gives people opportunities that simply would never exist outside of the EU.
Europe is positive, Brexit is nothing but a negative that will greatly harm living standards and already is. Fewer jobs, higher inflation with goods costing more to buy and just more weak or stagnant wages. Nobody on the Brexit side has spelled out one single positive for leaving the UK. Time to get real, Brexit can be stopped because the real will of the people is far stronger than any political hijacking of what that means.
The Scottish and Welsh governments have threatened to block the key Brexit bill which will convert all existing EU law into UK law. The repeal bill published earlier is also facing from Labour and other parties in the commons. Ministers are alledged to be optimistic about getting it through and ongoing intense dialogue with the devolved administration.
Welsh First Minister(Carwyn Jones) said the Repeal Bill to convert current EU laws into UK law was a naked power-grab which he could not support. Theresa May has been warned of immense constitutional crisis if she goes ahead with a key Brexit bill without devolved governments consent.
Give credit where its due for Maybot to suspend a Conservative MP. The Tories are more worried that they have lost one MP over a racist remarks during a Brexit fringe meeting. I’m sure the MP in concern will not be losing any sleep over her remarks. Let me be clear about this for a moment, this government of ours wants a cross party consensus on the table in Brexit negotiations who are you kidding Maybot could it be that the minority government has crashed into a brick-wall as European Union will reject the current proposal submitted by the government and the Conservative Backbenchers want their pound of flesh by wanting their dear leader to fail and a change of leadership challenge. Although the conservatives won with a small majority on the grounds of “Maybot just realised she can not depend on her backbenchers and Democratic Unionist Party(DUP) if this is the case then she might as well step down as the leader of her party and let someone else lead the Conservatives. So much for the Conservatives spin on “No deal is better than a bad deal”. This comes as no surprise for the Foreign Secretary told MPs European Union can go whistle for any extortionate final payment from the UK on Brexit and the government had no plan for what to do in the event of no deal being agreed with the EU. The sums he has seen that they proposed to demand from this country appear to be extortionate. Go whistle seems to him an entirely appropriate expression.
Brexit Secretary has said the lack of a Northern Ireland is a slightly problematic in terms of trying to resolve the future of the Irish border. He further suggested that technology and trusted traders schemes could help maintain a frictionless boarder when the UK leaves the customs union. Work had begun these area but was nowhere near a solution. He was giving evidence to a House of Lords committee.
British Standards Institution gave evidence to Lords Committee that they were optimistic the UK would retain its current role determining global rules in areas such as product safety. They warned that countries could make life difficult if politically motivated. A desire to do deals may see the UK sleepwalk into problems. The UK’s membership of European bodies that set industry-wide business standards cannot for granted after Brexit.
Michael Banier(Brexit Negotiator) said “The British position does not allow those persons concerned to continue to live their lives as they as they do today. There is still major differences between the EU and UK on the rights of EU citizen living in Britain. The European Court of Justice must have jurisdiction to guarantee citizens rights. It was essential that the UK recognise it’s financial obligations.
Labour Leader said that Labour will set out visions for Brexit when he meets the EU’s chief negotiator in Brussels. He will tell Michael Barnier he is ready to take up the responsibility for Brexit negotiations if there is a change in government. Michael Barnier will hold separate meetings with the First Minister(s) of Wales, and Scotland but insists he will only negotiate with the UK government
Ed Vaizey former minister told members of parliament the UK was proposing to leave the body on technically when it was actually distinct from EU urging a rethink. The government should publish legal advice regarding its decision to leave the European nuclear regulator.
Bob Neill said it would not be the first time legal advice given to ministers was incorrect.
Sir Amyas Morse( UK’s Public Spending watchdog) said had to be more united or the project would fall apart at the first tap like the segments of the chocolate treat. It needs to be coming through as uniform, a little bit more like a cricket ball. The government’s vague Brexit plan has been compared to a chocolate orange.
Intriguingly Damian Green(the First Secretary of State) deputized for Theresa May for Prime Minister Questions Time(PMQ) said “ The risk of the UK leaving the EU without any kind of deal is overstated. Both sides wanted a successful outcome. In reply Emily Thornberry said the Tories were in a mess over Brexit and urged ministers to get a grip and there were contingency plans for any failure to get a deal but the public were left in the dark.

Some of the comments were taken of my Facebook page like Bill Lees and John Chapman made some valid points which the Leader of Labour Party need to mention if Labour is going to influence the debate on the repeal bill:

Bill Lees wrote: Brexit is an unmitigated disaster and it’s simply not possible to negotiate any sort of exit deal that means the UK would be better off by relinquishing our membership of the EU than it would be by remaining in. This is becoming more apparent to more and more people with every day that passes, and it seems obvious that the much fetishised “will of the people” is no longer represented by the gerrymandered, non-binding, lie-driven result of the vote over 12 months ago.  It’s high time Labour stopped trying to pretend otherwise and started to represent the 48% plus of the referendum electorate that voted Remain, or would have done had they not been disenfranchised, most of which are natural Labour voters. It may indeed, be a matter simply of timing. Perhaps Jeremy Corbyn does indeed have a cunning plan, but his history of opposition to the EU makes me doubt it.  Interestingly though, the logic of Labour’s position, as outlined by Keir Starmer, implies that we actually are opposed to Brexit. Unlike the Tories, we have explicitly ruled out the possibility of departing the EU with “no deal”.  We also say that one of the key tests that we will apply as to the acceptability of any putative deal presented just before March 2019 is that the deal will have to deliver “the exact same benefits” (quoting David Davis!) as we currently enjoy via our membership of the EU, the Single Market, and the Customs Union. Which of course, is quite impossible to achieve, and would guarantee that any deal would be unacceptable and therefore rejected by Labour.  This does not seem to have been picked up, either by much of the electorate (hence Labour’s relative success/ avoidance of a massacre at the GE) , or much of the commentariat.  I’d like to see that position made more explicit. Again, it may simply entail biding our time until the disastrous true nature of Brexit is realised by more people and a detectable groundswell arises in favour of rejecting Brexit.  But the thing I really do find trying is the constant contortionism to try to demonstrate that we aren’t “going aganst the will of the people”) . We need to start characterising the referendum for what it was – a gerrymandered, non-binding opinion poll on a restricted electorate with no threshold built-in to ensure certainty for such a major constitutional change, the outcome of which was determined via blatant lies, distorted propaganda, and appeals to racist attitudes.

John Chapman wrote: Unfortunately, amongst a sizeable section of working class voters whom Labour needs to attract, there is no evidence that the dire results of Brexit are becoming more and more apparent. I quote in evidence swings from Labour to Conservative in last week’s local By-elections in Coleshill South and Middlesborough Ayresome. In both cases Conservatives hoovered up former UKIP votes. An approach that is more respectful of the EU Referendum result appears to be indicated if we are ever to achieve our objectives.  Well, Bill referring to the claim that in the GE former Kippers swung behind Labour in Northfield,there’s no way of knowing if that’s the case. Nationally, YouGov indicated  that the Tories actually had a a majority in social classes C2DE and Labour ( surprisingly) had a majority amongst ABC1 social classes, hence the actual anti-Labour swings in many mainly working class seats outside of major cities.. Hopefully, the march of events will change this situation, and open an opportunity for the approach you favour. However,the two recent By-elections that I quoted don’t seem to indicate that that’s happened yet

The leader of the Labour Party was right to say he can supply her with a copy of Labour manifesto in place of the Conservative manifesto and call for another early election. Don’t you just love it there are those who will be saying there is no magic money tree, if this is the case they find the magic money tree for the sum of 1.5 Billion pounds in favor of confidence and supply deal with the DUP and our public service workers are not receiving a proper pay deal(1% pay-cap) how is it fair to public sector workers and on the other hand the private sector get a 3.3 pay increase.


Public Services workers deserves better pay which side are you on

Here is all us should not forget, the next time MPs and Councillors ask for your vote ask them which they voted on Public Services pay

London Mayor was right to call on Theresa May to appoint commissioners to run Kensington and Chelsea Council after its leader resigned over the Grenfell Tower fire as public trust could not be restored by other members of the council, residents quite rightly felt desperately neglected and wanted action. It is understood that Kensington and Chelsea have chosen a new council leader. Nicholas Paget Brown will continue to be in place until 19 July when Elizabeth Campbell takes over as new leader.
I’m glad that Justice Minister David Lidington has complete confidence of Sir Martin Moore-Bick(Grenfell Tower Public inquiry chairman) is prepared to be very broad when investigating the causes of the fire. He will be looking at the construction which dates back to the 1970s when the tower was built to examine warnings that may have been missed. It’s a pity that the inquiry will not include the social issues in Kensington and Chelsea. However, I have more confidence in Emma Dent Caod Labour Member Of Parliament said that Sir Martin Moore – Brick was a “Technocrat who lacked credibility and the victim lawyers representing some of the families called for him to quit.
It transpires the government has ordered a taskforce to take over parts of Kensington and Chelsea Council in the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire. The council has been heavily criticised for its handling of the disaster on 14 June that killed around 80 people and still counting.
Weak and wobbly Maybot promises housing would be offered by Wednesday 5 July 2017 to those by offering temporary accommodation but only nine have so far been accepted and many are still in hostels. The Grenfell Response Team allegedly claimed 139 formal offers have been made. But North Kensington Law Centre which represents many victims, said some had been offered homes in other towers, other areas, or without enough rooms.

English Local Authorities a £5.8bn funding gap by 2020 without new sources of revenue, council leaders are warning. Services are running on a shoestring and councils must be at the front of the queue for extra cash. Lord Porter(LGA) argue they must be free to raise more council tax and keep all businesses rate income.
Headteachers in England are calling on MPs for answers on school funding shortage saying that they are still no closer to knowing their budgets. About 4,000 heads across 17 councils, mostly in southern England wrote to their member of parliament warning that schools face job loses and cuts to subjects. They say that the current levels of school funding is unsustainable.
Here is another U-Turn from the Conservatives manifesto scrap free school meals Nick Gibb(School Minister) is now saying the government would retain the existing provision having listened very carefully to the views of parents checkout Conservatives manifesto on Restricting free lunches to infants from poorer homes with free breakfast for all primary school pupils funded instead
It was alleged to save £650M a year but was left out of the queens speech
What a joker the chancellor of the exchequer has become insisting that the pay policy has not changed and the right balance must continue to be struck in terms of what is fair for workers and taxpayers and he understood people were weary after seven years of austerity. He rejects calls to take the foot off the pedal. Government must hold its nerves in the face of calls for a different path of higher taxes and borrowing.
Notice how David Cameron joined the debate in defence of Maybot by stating opponents of fiscal discipline are selfish not compassionate. Those who believed in sound finances were wrongly painted as uncaring. The exact reverse is true giving up sound finances isn’t being generous. He was the former Prime Minister who introduced the pay cap for public sector.
Demonstrators marched against the UK government’s economic policies which started from BBC Broadcasting House to Parliament Square. All of a sudden senior ministers are calling to lift the 1% pay cap, but don’t hold your breath can’t see it happening at the present time as the chancellor of the exchequer is saying on yer bike and wait to the autumn budget. It’s no wonder why public service workers feels undervalued and leaving the services to either set up their own consultancy or work abroad to put food on the table.
All well and dandy, you may think what about those who has not seen an increase on state benefits in line with inflation as food prices, children uniform, and cost of living increases. Some people may think those people on state benefits receive enough already. The truth is those who pass judgement don’t know the full facts as to why they are on benefits as each case should be judged on its merits as one side does not fit all. There is a job shortage in the country to employ skilled workers and unskilled workers and the situation will get worse before it gets better. Instead successful Governments are happy to bash the unemployed to gain votes as this seen as vote winners.
Nasty Party has admitted that they have to change hard to win over young power who voted Labour in June’s General Elections. Damian Green is on a mission to tell his party after losing their majority to form a government.
It’s been alleged by John Chapman(former chief of staff) Maybot had implemented “red lines” in Brexit talks and has hamstrung David Davis on European Court of Justice and among other things. It is further alleged that Theresa May would not get a Brexit deal through Parliament unless she showed more flexibility. This sounds like a warning to David Davis if you want my job as leader of Conservative Party I’m ensuring that I will give you a very hard time and ware you down to keep my job. Therefore taking all into account I feel that public service workers deserve more than 1% pay rise