“Tax rises may be necessary”? Not an auspicious start to the new year

We have become accustomed to regular bad news ever since ‘Age of Austerity’ style conference speeches. We need hope, not accountancy speak about cuts, pain, and deficit reduction.

But, while John Redwood has highlighted the need to cut tax on enterprise (I would add to that the working people who need to be incentivised to keep working, or to survive financially in the current climate), Iain Martin has demonstrated how the Conservative leadership doesn’t seem to know what its policies are on tax and is in a ‘tangle’.

I’ve thought long and hard about how to respond to Cameron’s new year speech and statements such as “tax rises may be necessary” from the Abominable Yes-Man* himself, Ken Clarke. Such sentiments are simply an inauspicious start to the new year and it is not what many people like me have been campaigning for when we have been delivering Conservative leaflets.

Since I am not a Tory myself, but a unionist, (the word ‘Tory’ has Irish baggage related to brigands, outlaws and the like), I am befuddled by the fuzzy logic that leads Clarke and the Nothing Hill set to come to the conclusion that tax rises will somehow bring the economy back to its glory days.

But, after all, it was the Europhile wing of the Conservatives that caused Black Wednesday by forcing Maggie to enter the ERM at the wrong rate. It was Lord Lamont, however, who famously sang in the bath that we had extricated ourselves from decades of economic collapse under the ERM and eventually the ECU/Euro that followed.

Never mind the historical precedents about what happens when you listen to Clarke and his ilk, it seems that the leadershipis taking advice from experts such as wealthy bankers and Ken Clarke. They say that accountants would slash and burn, whilst also raising taxes on already hard-pressed electors.

Is that the manifesto that is going to be offered to the country? Surely it is a recipe for a Hung Parliament – and, as much as we would like to see certain MPs with fraudulent expenses hanged, it would not be good for the country.

The Taxpayers’ Alliance had already won the debate on taxes. But along comes a bunch of idiots advising the Conservatives and those lessons are forgotten.

Why prioritise inheritance tax cuts for the wealthy, whilst raising taxes for middle- and lower-income people? Has the 50p tax rate made it acceptable to raise taxes?

What about the Laffer Curve? What about the economic fact that lower taxes stimulate economic growth, entrepreneurship, innovation, job creation and so on?

I do not know why they think tax rises and the age of austerity is going to appeal to the voter who has a difficult time paying the mortgage, raising kids, maybe health worries etc, and that there is no hope? Just more money out of yer pocket to pay the increasing social security and welfare budget?

In these tough economic times, taxes should be slashed – not raised – the lessons of Crewe & Nantwich were that lower taxes appeals to the voter. It is morally and ethically right and it makes life better for everyone.

And, as for the “class war”, well let me just say this. Had David Davis or someone else from a working-class background been Tory leader, he would not have even contemplated raising taxes on working people, while reducing inheritance tax. That says a lot about the state of society, the class divide, and the “Tories.”

We need Labour out, that’s for certain, but the alternative Government needs to get its act together for the sake of our country. Sorry to be so harsh but this needs to be said, and I say this as a warm friend, although one who thinks that a dear ally has somewhat lost its way.

* Clarke is a Yes-Man in the sense of “Yes to Europe”. I could live with it if he was a No-Man.

Good riddance to the Noughties, a disgusting decade

Happy New Year to all readers. And good riddance to the Noughties, a disgusting decade of decadence, greed, and political deception – whilst many folks have had the misfortune to lose jobs, homes, and in many cases their mental health. Families have had a tough time under new Labour. The third way was a trick with smoke and mirrors, with some Mandelsonian spin and a few unjustifiable, immoral, innocent-killing wars thrown in.

I, like many, have various resolutions. Campaigning for a ban on fireworks, after the terror the new Year celebrations caused our terrier, would be one.

But campaigning against Labour would be another. Not that I’m inspired by the Nothing Hill hooray Henries with their support for private schooling and Foxhunting. But, despite Osborne’s economic illiteracy (read the Telegraph’s Simon Heffer, who has exposed Osborne), I think the Conservatives are a better option for this country.

After the election, I resolve to dedicating myself a lot more to supporting my various charities, such as the NSPCC, and PETA, as well as a little political campaigning. It’s time to do some good to help the community, the kids, and the animals. That would be a different start to a new decade.

We should all see what we can do to help others and not ourselves. Maybe we’d all be a lot happier then?

A lessons for politicians too, methinks.

Hyvää uutavuotta kaikille!!!

That’s “Happy New Year everyone!!!” to those of you who don’t understand Finnish…

Would we be better off with a hung parliament?

I’ve done quite a bit of work leafleting for Conservative candidates in marginal seats. Also, I have delivered leaflets for someone I have known for over 25 years, who goes to my family church and who belongs to my Orange Lodge, Gregory Campbell MP (DUP, East Londonderry), to defend his seat against the highly discredited ‘Trimbleite’ (and now ‘Empeyite’) Ulster Unionist Party. Though, as an excellent MP and without much serious opposition, Gregory will be okay and will hold his seat, particularly with an 8,000 majority. In Northern Ireland the only party for unionists to vote for is the DUP, who I warmly endorse, and I’ve certainly enjoyed tramping the streets of Castlerock and the working-class housing estates of Coleraine delivering leaflets.

Peter Hitchens has recently called for a hung parliament. I don’t agree – I think we need a decisive result, one way or the other, a Conservative or Labour Government. Though I’m not a Tory, but am a unionist, (as I’m fond of saying, it’s the Conservative and Unionist Party), I would rather see a government of the blue persuasion.

But I can understand why many voters are yet unconvinced by the Tories and why the polls are narrowing ever so slightly in Labour’s favour.

But in these tough socio-economic times it would not be right to have a lily-livered, gutless hung parliament, minority government, or coalition-of-convenience delivered by a lily-livered, gutless electorate.

They just can’t make up their mind, being so zombified by the X Factor. Why not have a 90% tax levy on the proceeds that have been accrued by the likes of Cowell et al? Why stop at the bankers? But, in cases of mindnumbing TV, the electorate is as much zombies as the bankers, mortgagers, and mortgagees that caused the economic crisis. Or the equally morally bankrupt people who are destroying society.

So let’s have a clear result. But if you apply game theory to this situation, i.e. the election, people don’t know what way to vote. So it might be chaos, ending in a complete mess, with a BNP gain here and there, Lib Dems holding seats they should lose, etc.

In conclusion, the last thing we need is a hung parliament. Let’s get real, people, and kick Labour out once and for all.

NSPCC v Tatchell: Have we the guts to protect kids?

As someone who has campaigned on this blog for better child protection procedures and for tougher sanctions against abusers, I can categorically state that one of the most important challenges facing policy-makers is how to protect children.

The NSPCC reported earlier this year:

The statistics show there were 20,758 incidents where under-18s were recorded by police as victims of sex crimes … The number of offences recorded against girls was six times higher than the number against boys.

So around 85% of kids who have been recorded as having been molested, according to police, are girls, and 15% are boys; and many of these children are aged 15 and 16. A most disturbing recent trend has been the rising number of women molesting children (for example, Vanessa George and various teachers who abused teenage boys). Worryingly, the likes of Peter Tatchell are campaigning for an age of consent of 14:

QUOTE

I believe the time has come for a calm, rational reassessment of the age at which young people should be lawfully entitled to have sex. We need this debate because the current age of consent of 16 ignores reality.

An age of consent of 14 might be more realistic and reasonable than 16. If sex at 14 is consensual, and no one is hurt or complains, is criminalisation in the public interest? Is it in the 14-year-old’s interest? It is fair?

UNQUOTE

Considering the shocking NSPCC statistics (and we may be in more for bleak news in an early 2010 press release from the charity), and despite the despicable campaigning by people of Tatchell’s ilk, we must protect girls and boys from abuse.

How can we do this? First, the age of consent must be defended; in reality, it should probably be higher; but, at the least, it should not be lowered – to lower it would not only expose more 14- and 15-year-olds to abuse, but would lead to a failure of prosecution against molesters of those children who are slightly younger, i.e. 12- and 13-year-olds.

Second, it is important to move beyond the simplistic view that we should merely ‘tick boxes’ and only stop those on the sex offenders register working with kids, via CRB checks, i.e. those who have been detected. We need a strategy to deal with the undetected, and to protect children from those who are potential abusers.

Third, and as a way of enacting justice as well as providing a deterrent, convicted child molesters should be subject to a whole-life tariff. The current strategy of reintegrating them into the community simply is not working, as demonstrated by the recent Panorama documentary as well as by the appallingly high reoffending rates (and that does not include undetected activity), as well as the disgusting shenanigans of perverts on the Internet.

Does our political class have the guts to tackle this pandemic?

From the Corus crisis to the tragedy of Teesside

It is devastating to hear the news that the Corus plant in Redcar is going to be ‘mothballed’, perhaps signalling the death knell to the area’s steel industry and highlighting what a sorry state the economy, and industry in general, is in in this country.

A Labour Government has overseen a far greater decline of industry than there was under Margaret Thatcher. Isn’t that a grim indictment of this dreadful Brownite government?

The Corus crisis has been going on for some time now. The British Steel works, at their peak, employed tens of thousands of people. Now the last 1,700 have been given their marching orders, as owner Tata has decided to close the plant, complaining about the failure of the consortium to come to a solution.

Declining demand is only part of the problem. We have a Government that is more interested in keeping its pals in the City of London banks happy by having uncompetitive exchange rates that’s good for speculators and those who dabble in foreign exchanges, derivatives, and so on.

The London fat cat has got fatter at the expense of the worker in places like Redcar and elsewhere.

There are 1,700 workers, and many families with their kids facing a bleak future this Christmas thanks to this dreadful news.

It’s not just the jobs, it’s the symbolism of the closure of the steelworks, that has cast a further shadow over a once great industrial area.

People lining their pockets elsewhere have colluded in the dire state of our economy that’s led to this situation. We need a mindset change from government in terms of how it handles industry.

After all, if we don’t make anything that adds any value, and keeps decent working people in jobs, and all we do is shuffle money around the world and get paid commission and bonuses (and many of those involved in that profession are far from decent, we must admit), then what as a country are we for?

It’s no use saying “oh, let them take benefits”. Jobs and economic renewal is what places like Teesside and other parts of the North, and of the Midlands, need.

This Government, despite being Labour and formed for the people, isn’t going to deliver that; all they will deliver is more expenses wheezes and other ways of making as much money for themselves as possible.

It’s an absolute disgrace.

Afghanistan – time to withdraw

John McCain just admitted on BBC newsnight that during the Obama Afghan surge ‘casualties will rise.’

This is just not acceptable. Enough of our young kids who are serving in the army have returned in coffins.

No, it’s time to withdraw British troops from Afghanistan rather than spilling more blood for a doomed mission.

Even Des Brown, defence minister, is stepping down from parliament; perhaps he can’t stomach the stench of blood.

It’s quite simply time to withdraw.

The hidden bank bailout

This blog has been consistent in its criticism of Brown’s bank bailouts.

But at least most were open. We now learn that taxpayers’ money was used to bail out, secretly, the HBOS and Lloyds merger, deceiving shareholders.

Concealment is ok where it is reasonable and outweighs the alternative – the greater of two evils.

But deception is wrong and, like Bliar’s Iraq lies, it is becoming a hallmark of this disgusting Government. Time to call it a day, Mr Brown.

Will Brown blow the Tories out of the water? No, he hasn’t the guts to call an election

As a traditional ‘divided loyalties’ Ulster Protestant (a supporter of a mainstream unionist party at home, and of the Conservative & Unionist Party in England), I am rather worried. My dual loyalties mean that one of my parties may do well and the other not so; that’s certainly been the case recently.

But I thought the Conservatives were on track to beat Labour. Now the polls have narrowed, with the latest IPSOS-MORI for the Observer showing only a 6 point lead and the grim prospect of a hung parliament. With UKIP and the ‘vile BNP’ polling well collectively.

So what happened the the twentysomething Conservative lead? I have a hunch that the Clarke effect combined with Lisbon/the EU policy, and the appalling abuses of the expenses system by Tory MPs (most recently the adulterous David Curry, himself a notorious Europhile), and the sudden electorate’s collective misapprehension that the economy’s well again, has led to this scenario.

All’s not rosy in the garden, as Labour’s Wilted rose shows, and it’s time for another festive onslaught re the economy from me.

It’s now the right time for Labour to call an election. They’d probably gain a lead in the polls while the public are distracted by the apparent lull in our economic rendezvous with the inevitable.

Brown would blow the Tories out of the water. But, like Callaghan in the 70s, Brown is blinded by disbelief and a lack of COURAGE, and hasn’t got the guts to call the election that could keep him in the job he plotted for over a decade to grab off Bliar. The ditherer will bottle it again.

Brown’s gutlessness allows traditional Tories, as well as trade unionist, dual-loyalty conservative unionists like me, sleep soundly at night.

What is the truth about drugs? Time for action?

Whatever the truth about drugs, the Government has made a mess of the issue. They have let druggies, paedos, and all sorts of criminals roam our streets and cause absolute chaos and it has resulted in a lot of broken lives.

Prof David Nutt (sacked for telling the truth that Brown reclassified cannabis for political reasons) has categorised drugs in such a way that suggests that alcohol is more dangerous than ecstacy, cannabis and other illegal substances. Well, we know already that booze causes a lot of heartbreak and is responsible for some of societies worst ills. But, why when we had the chaos of alcohol-related violence and the deaths caused by its healths effects (a “known known”), did the Government have to take a softer line on certain other drugs, by reclassifying cannabis and turning a blind eye?

Why indeed. But, more importantly, what are they going to do about it? Clearly, we need zero tolerance on drugs – by crushing dealers, locking up and forcibly treating junkies, and by stopping the violence caused on our streets by alcohol (3 strikes and you’re out might just work) – otherwise Britain will continue to descend into lawlessness.

It’s time for less of the political nonsense, by politicians with their hands in the till for all the expenses they can obtain. Whether it’s Jacqui Smith, a complete farce on Question Time this week, or whether it’s McNulty subsidising his parents’ home. (And don’t get me started about the liberal elite – such as the contemptible John Sergeant and his sick joke about Cheryl Gillan’s dogs who have now sadly died.)

It’s time to sort out this mess once and for all. No more political correctness. No more fussing about the so-called human rights of the perpetrators of these vile deeds. No more softly softly. It’s time to take action, right?

Down’s baby murders

As someone not yet fortunate to be a dad, I abhor those who murder their babies in their womb – children that I and many other folks, who have not become parents for various reasons, would happily raise as our own.

Thousands of babies who have Down’s syndrome are being murdered in the in a recent upsurge in Eugenics. Harman may claim to be for equality and against the BNP, but is the Nazi genocide of disabled children something she can stomach supporting?

Some hospitals won’t tell expectant Indian women the gender of their baby because of fears of female Foeticide? So why is it ok to selectively murder disabled babies in the womb?

Who could fail to be moved by Sue Hare on p27 of today’s Telegraph talking about her little boy with Downs as her ‘pride and joy’? How many kids like young Will are snuffed out because of the prejudice and psychosis of their parents and the eugenics abortion doctors who perform these vile acts?

Three seminal moments: Race, religion, and war

I experienced three seminal moments in the last 5 days or so.

First was watching Question Time on Thursday evening with a friend and his wife, who are both Muslims. Their discomfort at Griffin was understandable.

Second, as I passed through Birmingham city centre on Sunday, there was a military display of some kind on near the Bull Ring. Some young Pakistanis turned away from walking towards the army display, shaking their heads. A teenage girl wearing a headscarf seemed particularly vexed. As an Ulster Protestant, I have much time for the army. The army is part of being British, but I realised then that something had been robbed from these young British Asians by Blair’s (he ordered it) and Brown’s (he paid for it) disastrous Iraq and Afghan campaigns. They can’t support the army, given our killing of Iraqi and Afghan innocents – the children’s blood being on Labour’s hands. British Asians are true British people and amongst the most hard-working, and they also have solid family values, strong community values, genuine morality (e.g. marriage being a bedrock of family), and high levels of entrepreneurship that we should be proud of.

Third, I watched the classic animated Japanese film “Grave of the Fireflies” for the first time. A story of a young brother and sister trying to survive in Japan during the end of WWII, despite devastating firebombing by the Americans of civilians. It is a very upsetting film, and yet beautifully made, and at the end I must admit that I did cry. Watch it and dare say you are “pro-war”.

We haven’t moved much further beyond the 1945 firebombing of civilians, have we, though? At least we will not repeat the disastrous mistakes of Iraq and Afghanistan by bombing Iranian women and children too; at least I hope we won’t (whatever you think of Ahmadinejad). War, race, and religion may be intertwined but, as an evangelical Christian, I for one cannot support the bombing of innocents that was a central part of the wars on the Afghan and Iraqi people – and nor will I support the same being inflicted upon the Iranians.

Last post?

Don’t worry – it’s not my last post on this blog. What it is, though, is a reflection on the state that the Labour party – ably abetted, it seems, by its mates in the European Union – has left our postal service. What was once the pride of the world is now greatly reduced. The Half-Blood Welshman has an excellent post on the subject, and highlights a point that frontline politicians – from all parties – seem to have missed:

It all boils down to a brutal fact. If we want a postal service that can deliver whatever we want, wherever and whenever we want it, it will have to be funded from general taxation, because such a business will always run at a loss. If we want a truly commercial, profitable service, then we have to accept that it cannot deliver the same extent and level of service as Royal Mail. From that point of view, both Parliament and (to a lesser extent) the unions are shadow-boxing over irrelevant points of structure. At some point in the next five years, the call between these two choices will have to be made. I have to admit I am very glad that I will not have to make it.

This is simply because of the EU directive that created a semi-market in the UK postal service. Effectively, they allowed private companies to cream off the handling (but, of course, not the delivery) of the most lucrative and profitable part of the postal market. But your hard-pressed postie, working for the Royal Mail, still has to deliver it.

It is almost Lewis Carroll. In fact, Carroll wasn’t that mad.

Mandelson is supporting the Royal Mail and not the strikers. He is turning on his own people. It is time that folks realise that Labour is not for the working men and women at all; and it is time to sort out this dreadful postal mess, but not by strike-breaking or further exacerbating the conditions of the hard-working posties and their colleagues in sorting offices and elsewhere.

Otherwise, it will be the last post (not from me, but from the Royal Mail).

Labour snouts in troughs as Royal Mail staff strike

Labour MPs are threatening not to repay what they scammed on expenses; some will even sue, they say. Tories will be deselected if they don’t.

Meanwhile, Royal Mail workers will rightly go on strike because of the way the most profitable business has been creamed off by other providers who don’t even deliver the mail.

Mandelson is against the strike, though he forgets why trades unions exist, and why Labour came into being. Not to have snouts in troughs, that’s for sure.

“Wholly, exclusively and necessarily” : Expenses raise their ugly head again

Well, it seems that no sooner are we out of the conference season, than expenses have raised their ugly head again. The conference season – despite Mandelsonian spin, and attempts by Mandy to position himself as the next Labour leader (and rumour has it that he will renounce his peerage so he can be parachuted in to stand for parliament in my local seat of Darlington) – has been an unmitigated disaster for Labour: the Sun switching sides to back the Tories, and the latest opinion polls putting Labour up to 19 points (C 45 , L 26, LD 18 etc) behind the Conservatives.

And now we hear that there are to be about 325 MPs asked to justify or pay back their expenses, which should be

wholly
exclusively and
necessarily

incurred for the purposes of carrying out their duties as an MP.

Indeed, the BBC carries a notorious quote from the Sub-Prime Minister:-

“We’ve got to consign the old discredited system to the dustbin of history, this is part of the process of doing so.

“Sir Thomas Legg will make recommendations, people have the chance to look at what he says.

“And then my advice to people is after the process has gone through in the next few weeks he says you’ve got to repay, let’s get it done, let’s get it sorted out and let’s get it back to a system that people have confidence in.”

It’s the Labour Government that we need to consign to the dustbin of history, and (whatever the recommendations) the British people will in another 9 months have an opportunity to do just that. At least we can sort out poverty, our economy and social breakdown – the socio-economic issues that really matter, that can be resolved by radical conservative policy – rather than listen to more and more sleaze about crooked MPs. It’s time for change, and not more of the same of the discredited third way that amounted to a pocket-lining exercise for career politicians.

BREAKING NEWS – Jacqui Smith to apologise. Why will she not just resign her seat, rather than embarrass the Government and Brown any further ? Good question. But then she is trying to avoid paying back the £116,000. And not to forget that Gordon Brown himself will have to pay back a staggering £12,000.