Category Archives: Labour Lies

Bryan Gould disowns New Labour

Hat tip to Tom Harris for pointing out Bryan Gould’s article, I disown this government, in the Guardian’s Comment is Free.

I remember Mr Gould, former Labour MP and member of the shadow cabinet, as a seemingly decent sort of bloke – far too decent for New Labour, as it transpires.

He returned to his native New Zealand in the mid-Nineties to work in a university, but disowns his former Party with these words.

The floor is all yours, Mr Gould…

Those, like me (and almost everyone I know in the Labour party), who have been critical over the years of New Labour and its record in government, might have expected that the passage of time would bring with it a kinder judgment. And in my case, in particular, it might have been thought that – 12,000 miles away in New Zealand – distance would lend enchantment.

How, then, to explain that the more we take the long view of the Blair and now the Brown government, the sharper seem the contours of its failures and betrayals? How is it that the features of its landscape that grow – as our perspective lengthens – in shocking, anger-making prominence are those shameful episodes at home and abroad which cumulatively are a complete denial of what a Labour government (or any British government) should have been about?

There have been of course many good and decent day-by-day achievements of this government. Across the whole range of political issues, I do not say that Britain did not do better under Labour than it would have done under most alternatives. But these achievements have been molehills, judged against the towering peaks scaled by New Labour in its rejection not only of Labour, but of any decent and civilised values.

The first – and for that reason perhaps most unexpected – contravention of civilised norms was the Iraq war. The damning judgment of that doomed enterprise has been repeatedly rehearsed, but to read the charge sheet again is still a shocking experience. A British prime minister, claiming the right to moral leadership and an almost religious duty to confront evil, sucked up to a soon-to-be discredited US president and helped to launch an invasion of a distant country – an invasion based upon a lie, and one that flew in the face of international law, undermined the United Nations, alienated the whole of the Muslim world, seemed to validate the claims of terrorists and those who recruited them, destroyed the country that was invaded and killed hundreds of thousands of its citizens, took many young soldiers to their unnecessary deaths, and rightly reduced Britain’s standing in the world.

The New Labour government still refuses to acknowledge that any of this was wrong. It will not even countenance an independent inquiry into how such a fatal mistake was made.

It may seem improbable that the scale of the Iraq calamity could be matched in any other area of government. Yet, as the reasons for and scale of the global recession become clear, it is also increasingly apparent that another global (as well as British) disaster can be laid – substantially, if only partly – at the door of the New Labour government.

It was, after all, that government which enthusiastically endorsed the virtues of the “free” market, which turned its back on the need for regulation, which celebrated the excesses of the City, which proclaimed that it was “intensely relaxed about people becoming filthy rich”. The government that should have protected the interests of ordinary people was dazzled by the super-rich; unsuspecting Labour supporters found themselves thrown on the tender mercies of a marketplace that was cleared of any limits that might have restricted the rich and powerful. There have been no more enthusiastic cheerleaders for the culture of greed and excess than New Labour ministers.

On the central issue of politics – the willingness of government to use its democratic legitimacy to intervene in the market in order to restrain its excesses – the New Labour government ensured that the dice lay where they fell and applauded as they did. It was Tony Blair who, standing shoulder to shoulder with Rupert Murdoch, proclaimed that the future lay with the “globalisers” and that those who wanted to reclaim some control over their lives were “isolationists, nationalists and nativists”. It was Gordon Brown who removed the major economic decisions from democratic control and handed them over to unaccountable bankers.

That betrayal of those who looked to a Labour government to help them has seen a rapid widening of inequality and a sharp intensification of social disintegration. It is the jobs, homes and lives of ordinary people that have borne the brunt. The country is a weaker and poorer place as a result.

But even that failure pales by comparison with the latest revelations about the abandonment by New Labour of any pretence to civilised standards. We now know that this government connived with the Bush administration to hold people illegally, to kidnap them in secret, and to torture them while in custody – all in the name of a war against the forces of darkness. The perpetrators of these outrages seem to believe that they can be washed clean by simply declaring their superior morality.

Nothing more clearly distinguishes those beyond the pale than their willingness to use the secret, illegal and cowardly infliction of pain to terrify, cow and bend to their will helpless people being held without charge or trial or legal redress. It beggars belief that any British government could, in a supposed democracy, do so, and not even bother to respond to its critics. It is simply incredible that a Labour government claiming to represent the values of the Labour movement could believe in these circumstances that it has any right to remain in office.

For me, this is too much. I am sick to the stomach. I disown this so-called Labour government. I protest.


Filed under Economy, Heroes and Cowards, Iraq, Labour Lies, Torture, UK Politics

The Nation Speaks – Part III

A big thank you to Paddy Connaughton from Bolton who emailed me recently:

Hello Stewart,

The reason i’m writing this is the fact i have just stumbled upon your website. Thank God someone is out there telling the truth about this government and the state of our country. I have read some of your articles and have found that my wife and i agree with all of them.

After 22 years of working hard in the building industry, paying my taxes and trying to be a good citizen, I was made redundant in 2007, found two more jobs only to be laid off due to this economic depression. For all the talk by Gordon about public works and getting us back into work, i find nothing is being done. I now believe the government just don’t care about mine or anybody else’s situation.

I am beginning to think this is all a plan by the new fascist state of New Labour to keep the majority of manual workers on minimum wages. For too long these people have hacked into every aspect of our lives and eroded our freedoms of expression in order to control us. So thanks Stewart for having the guts to openly stand up to them, even with the threat of the the Police spying on you. I just wish the people of England could show a bit more of a backbone and publicly show their contempt for this government by openly defying them as the brave French and Icelandic people so often have.

Keep the faith, Paddy

Thank you for those kind words. I have to say though, that it doesn’t take much guts to stand against a government that has shown itself to be so completely reprobate. In my case, Labour’s failure to honour their manifesto promise to hold a referendum on Europe, was the straw that broke the camel’s back. It is now a matter of standing up for our country and our freedom or losing everything to the whore that sits in Brussels.

The way the government has betrayed the young people, especially, makes me sick. No, the time came when I realised I had nothing left to lose by speaking out and I wished I had started years ago, but better late than never. Hopefully.

I will keep the faith. There is no fear in love and there is no strength like God’s.

Feel free to email me with your own views. I only publish names after gaining the permission of the writer.

Leave a comment

Filed under Economy, EU, Labour Lies, Police State, UK Politics

The Nation Speaks – Part II

Paul Mullins searched for ‘treason’ and ‘Labour’ on Google. My site was ranked Number One.

As you might have noticed, I haven’t been adding many articles lately. I will explain another time. Here is Paul Mullins’ email. Yes, it is very sensible!

Hi Stewart, I am emailing as a result of finding your website when I did a search for the words ‘treason’ and ‘Labour’ on google.

First let me say that I am sure thousands , probably millions of Britons share your, and may I say my views, that this labour government has done something that the Nazis, and the French failed to do in successive centuries, that is destroy this country. An act that can only be classed as treason, and should carry the penalty that befits such a crime.

Their selling out to Europe through the reform ‘treaty’, the broken promise of letting the people vote it out, Blair handing over power to Brown as if it were his right to ellect a successor, and now Labours (Browns) assertion that we are suffering as a result of the Global recession, and not their overspending, a half truth which shows the utter innability of the pondlife which now pervade the government to own up to any mistakes, failures or darn right lies which they have blinded the population with for over a decade.

I always believed that the extreme left in this country were happy to destroy Britain if they didn’t get their own way, ie extreme power, but having gotten it, I never believed they would use the guise of New Labour to carry out this treachery.

And lets face it, liberal is now the new socialsm, but with none of the truthfulness that cost socialism the mandate to govern for twenty years. the only thing that liberals want are votes, like the tories, but they are prepared increase the population of this country via the open Eupopean door policy, and try to convince people that there are jobs to be filled which migrant workers can do. Funny how they haven’t rethought this view now that unemployment is rising.

Well thats my rant, who am I?

I was a member of UKIP up till last year when I realised that it is as bad as the other parties in as much as all the leaders are from the upper classes, and have their own interests at heart, although they are against our domination by europe, and do a commendable job to expose that trechery, they have little interest in the ordinary man in the street, and are in the majority disaffected tories.

I believe there is a void in British politics which could be filled by a party which has the interests of the British people at heart. Those people who have lived here and worked here, not from some European edit which says they can, but because they want to make Britain great again. I also feel strongly that the MP’s who have caused the chaos which now live in should be held to account, and if it’s treason, then they should pay.

Put that to the population and see the reaction. Dump the PC, and Human rights garbage which makes people scared to speak out, and remove some of the draconian laws which are seriously threatening our freedom of speech. We are at risk of terrorism, but this has been brought about by this goverments policies, get rid of them, and I am sure that threat will be diminished. And if it’s not, deal with the threat appropriately, not by gagging the innocent.

I hope this comes across as sensible rather than a rant (my wife is exposed to those, so I refrain from them now!)

I look forward to hearing your views, while we can still speak freely!

Kind regards

Paul Mullins

Feel free to email me with your own views. I only publish names after gaining the permission of the writer.

Leave a comment

Filed under EU, Labour Lies, Police State, UK Politics

The Nation Speaks – Part I

Since starting this website almost a year ago, I have received many emails of encouragement and also messages of despair about the way our great land is being destroyed from within.

I received this email last week from Mr John MacDonald of Birmingham, who wanted to deliver his message to Gordon Brown. He said he doesn’t usually write letters and was unable to email the Prime Minister. I know some politicians have stumbled upon this site – from the raw data files and from personal contacts.

I don’t know if the PM has ever visited, but with his obvious inability to listen and empathise, I doubt if he does much surfing the ‘net.

If you do happen to read this, Mr Brown, here is what Mr MacDonald wants to tell you:

This crime against the British working classes. Namely the hiring of foreign labour to fill British jobs. Almost seems as if Gordon Brown is determined to stir up Civil Strife with this IDIOT Policy of actively allowing cheap labour in from abroad. Everything he does seems to be in favour of Big Business and against the British working people.

I’m a Pensioner and worked and lived through the THATCHER years. That was the worst period of my life. Now it looks like we’ve got a male Thatcher in Brown. The other Idiocy I must mention is this Governments worse than crazy Immigration policy. Policy? Joke! Get a grip Gordon. I was a Labour voter all my life, as was my dad before me. No More!

LABOUR’S GOING TO LOSE, Mr Brown. Your fault, you and New Labour’s.

Is there anyone anywhere capable of running this country for ALL of us and not just the monied classes? The Tory, as always isn’t to be trusted.

If I could afford it, I’d leave these shores and let you totally screw it up. You sure haven’t too far to go now.

John MacDonald

Watch out for the next installment.

1 Comment

Filed under Immigration, Labour Lies, UK Politics

Red Faces

I have been unable to post anything this week due to a busy work schedule, which included sorting out my financial affairs in order to send a large chunk of my money to the Government by the end of the month to pay for abortions, wars (well, bombs and bullets, not sufficient protection for soldiers), sex-change operations, condoms and abortion pills for schoolchildren, faceless anti-British bureaucrats in Brussels, the promotion of homosexuality, bailing out the banks, politicians’ salaries and expenses and tasers as early birthday presents for the police.

Why am I complaining? If they let me keep the money, I would only waste it.

Fortunately, Leg-iron has summed up the past few days of our glorious leaders’ rule with this excellent article….

No wonder the Labour party favours red. It’s the colour of their faces.

Milkybar has managed to enrage half a continent in less time than it takes to pass out the white chocolate treats. He really should have stuck to waving toy guns and grinning with teeth that have never been tainted with chocolate. The Gorgon has had to send out Count Mandelson to smooth things over, but that left the Gorgon running things here.

Which meant that Mrs. Bucket ended up insisting on TV that there was to be a free vote while the Gorgon was calling a three line whip. When he found out he wasn’t allowed to whip opposition MPs, he called off the vote at the last minute. Then moaned that the opposition wouldn’t do as he said. The clue is in the name, Gorgon.

Peter Hain was caught with his hand in the till and ordered to apologise. That’s British justice these days; the more important you are, the lower the sentence.

MP Dawn Butler has a lovely little note signed by the Boss of America, Barack Obama, even though she can’t spell his name. He wrote it on House of Commons notepaper. Which was nice.

As for all that ‘thinking of the children’….

They’d better not believe Labour is going to get them into University.

The schools are run by Righteous who promote family and can’t see a problem with that. All those new specialist schools do well because they suck funds from other schools, so it’s no wonder children are turning to booze and drugs.

Labour: Tough on education, tough on the causes of education. What was that other slogan the Tiny Blur was so fond of? Oh yes, it was ‘Crime, crime , crime’.

Knife crime is at an all-time low, if you look at the charts upside-down as the Ripper has been doing all along. A month ago she said ‘Whoops, someone’s leaked figures showing knife crime is down’. Now, school kids wear stab vests to school because knife crime is, in fact, up by 18 per cent. Better check you have those charts the right way up before leaking them accidentally in future, Ripper.

In Scotland, the SNP justice minister has been called on to resign because he missed a summit on knife crime. In Westmonster, the Home Economics Secretary will be allowed to mumble an apology and carry on with no regard to real life, as usual. (He won’t resign. He’s a politician. They have no honour and no shame.)

The UK’s new growth industry, burglary, is showing above-inflation increases in productivity. The Ripper blames it on the government’s idiotic policies the police being hamstrung by quotas and political correctness and idiot bosses someone else. Fraud and forgery is doing so well it’ll soon be listed on the Stock Exchange. It’s certainly more profitable than the banks.

So what is all this? A late summary of 2008? No, it’s a selection of a few of the news stories over the last couple of days. Not even a week’s worth, and there are far too many to put into a single post as it is.

Anyone presiding over a company that had two or more humiliating reports in the press in the same month would be forced out of office at once. The Brown Gorgon presides over a government that has dozens of humiliating reports every day. He and his drones insist all is well and if there is anything wrong, it’s because there are still members of the public who haven’t been arrested yet.

Gorgon, here’s a suggestion, a line of wasted type because you’ve never listened to anyone and never will. Here it is anyway.

Try looking with the good eye for a while.

Well done, Leg-iron.


Filed under Crime and Punishment, Education, Heroes and Cowards, Labour Lies, Moral Meltdown, UK Politics

Blix may testify against Iraq war makers

Don’t sleep so easily, war criminals of New Labour:

Mon, 22 Dec 2008
Press TV, Iran

A former UN chief weapons inspector says he is ready to testify about the false US allegations which led to the Iraq war before a tribunal.

Hans Blix, in a Sunday interview with Al Jazeera television said he and the Head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed ElBaradei, were subjected to implicit threats from US Vice President Dick Cheney in the run-up to the Iraq war.

The former top UN inspector said Cheney had also threatened to defame ElBaradei and him if they refused to provide the “required” information on Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction.

“The Bush administration misled Americans and the world by creating a hype about weapons of mass destruction in order to justify the invasion of Iraq,” Blix added.

The Swedish constitutional lawyer had earlier in 2004 told NBC News that, “It is probable that the governments were conscious that they were exaggerating the risks they saw in order to get the political support they would not otherwise have had.”

Blix, who was the director general of the IAEA from 1981 to 1997, added that he is ready to testify about the false US allegations before an international tribunal.

After the invasion of Iraq and the US failure to find the alleged WMD in the country, intelligence officials were severely criticized for relying “too much on defectors and exercising too little critical judgment in assessing their information.”

Earlier in January 2008, members of the House Judiciary Committee called for starting impeachment hearings against Cheney.

The House Judiciary Committee members accused Cheney of “manipulating intelligence to deceive Congress and the American people about a fabricated threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.”

Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Vice President Dick Cheney made a false claim on NBC that Iraq had been the ‘geographic base’ for the attacks.

However, President George W. Bush acknowledged on September 17, 2003 that, “We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the 11 September attacks.”

From: Press TV, Iran

Leave a comment

Filed under Iraq, Labour Lies, Media Conditioning, US Politics

Labour’s Families in Britain paper admits married parents are best for children

Steve Doughty
Daily Mail
19th December 2008

(My emphasis in bold; my comments in italics):

Labour has finally admitted that married parents are better for children than parents in live-in partnerships, and that they stick together more than twice as long.

Broken families and missing parents are bad for children and for the country, ministers said, in a Government paper on the state of family life that marks a U-turn on previous party thinking.

The document accepts that ‘some family forms face greater challenges than others‘.

This is because the only natural family is, er, a natural one, not any old arrangement, defined as family, by any pressure group that demands recognition and preferential treatment.

Seven out of ten young criminals come from single parent homes that make up only a quarter of all families, it says, adding that stepfamilies can also be difficult for children. But the report still falls short of declaring that marriage is a good thing.

I guess there would be far too many self-appointed ‘experts’ jumping up and down if the Government were to admit the realisation, finally, that, political correctness really has “gone mad”.

The ‘evidence paper’ – produced by Children’s Secretary Ed Balls and Cabinet Office minister Liam Byrne – rejects the idea of any state support for marriage and married couples.

What, support the majority? Do the right thing? Use their own evidence of the problems caused by marriage breakdown and change policies to improve society?

Instead it says the answer to family crisis at the heart of what critics call ‘broken Britain’ is more money for the poor and more counselling to encourage ‘quality relationships’.

I thought they just rejected supporting married couples, so what is this supposed to mean? What is a “quality relationship” in Ed Balls’ world?

What does this mean in plain English? It means they will keep on promoting all types of relationship and stuff marriage as a special and very valuable way of life.

I wonder what form the ‘counselling’ will take, when schoolchildren are increasingly being led to believe that any relationship is acceptable.

Don’t governments just love to break things and then offer ‘solutions’?

The admission that stepfamilies are often troubled and that two parents are good for children reverses the official thinking that all kinds of families are equally good. The paper was published as Mr Balls met a group of media agony aunts at a ‘relationship summit’ to discuss help for families that are breaking up.

He said: ‘We know how important stable family relationships are to the well-being of both adults and children.’

The Families in Britain paper was the first major Government statement on family life since 1998.

It accepted a mountain of evidence that single parent families and step-families are not as good for children and the rest of society as families headed by married parents.

It said that seven out of ten young criminals come from single parent families, that children of single parents do worse at school, that two thirds of such families are poor, and a third of single mothers are depressed.

An absent parent can be associated with adverse material and emotional outcomes,’ the paper found.

Step-families, it found, produce outcomes for children ‘similar to those growing up in lone parent families’. Their children ‘show more psychological and behavioural problems than children in biological two-parent families’.

Married couples are happier and richer, and their children are better behaved and do better at school, the paper said.

Marriages last on average more than 11 years, it admitted, while only a fifth of cohabitations last as long as five.

The paper conceded that all studies have shown that the beneficial effects of marriage are greater than can be explained by the greater wealth or better education of married couples. But nevertheless it found the evidence ‘ambiguous’.

Ambiguous? Does the evidence look ambiguous to you? The social engineers really have a problem accepting reality, don’t they?

It concluded: ‘The quality of relationships matters most regardless of the legal form.’

This is a cracker! So after all that, they still ignore their own evidence and will continue to betray children, the country and common sense and decency.

Tory families spokesman Maria Miller called for state support for marriage and said the tax and benefits system is biased against two-parent families.

P.S. I have respect and admiration for single people who do the best they can for their children, but a society that promotes any other form of relationship than marriage between a man and woman does the children a great disservice.

It is that simple. It is also very important for the whole of society, as is evidenced by the prison figures and the massive numbers of other dysfunctions exacerbated by the dumbing down and general re-engineering of civilisation as we used to know it.

Labour – do the RIGHT thing for once and promote and support marriage!

Leave a comment

Filed under Labour Lies, Moral Meltdown, Social Engineering, UK Politics

An eminently sensible politician (sadly he’s in the Lords, in opposition)

I spotted this speech made last week by Lord Waddington which he gave on the fourth day of the debate on the Queen’s Speech.

I am not a Tory, but imagine if we had Lord Waddington, a former home secretary, to replace the present holder, Jacqui Smith.

Lord Waddington (Conservative) | Hansard source

My Lords, the noble Baroness, Lady Quin, will forgive me if I do not follow her in her remarks, although I found them interesting. I know that noble Lords will appreciate it if I do not add to the sea of words about Damian Green, but perhaps I will be forgiven for saying something about policing.

These days, the priorities of the police do not seem to correspond very neatly with the priorities of the public. Chasing around the country to arrest a man for making a tasteless joke at a country fair, questioning a woman for doubting the wisdom of gay adoption, investigating remarks made by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Chester and arresting a man the other day for making a bonfire on bonfire night and charging him with arson all seem a daft use of police time.

Of course the police have to respond to complaints and follow procedures, but a little common sense along the way might come in handy. The enthusiasm with which in recent years the police have set about responding to the Government’s often zany priorities and the massive resources employed to hunt down those responsible for leaking government documents that in no way damage national security but expose government incompetence sit rather oddly with the reluctance of the police to deal with offences such as burglary, which really do concern the public, with a plea of a lack of resources. All is not well. I make only one suggestion today, perhaps with my tongue in my cheek. Perhaps it would help if there were fewer sociologists at the top and more down-to-earth coppers such as those whom we are privileged to have in this House.

In these stirring times, people may be surprised to hear that I have some sympathy with the Home Secretary. She must have been pretty horrified by the latest revelations of incompetence in the Home Office, particularly coming so shortly after she had gone into her office and found the shambles of immigration control there. It is about that shambles that I should now like to speak. I am afraid that I do not at all agree with the remarks made by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Portsmouth.

Let us go right back to 1997. Labour’s 1997 election manifesto stated that all modern countries,

“must have firm control over immigration and Britain is no exception”.

That was a clear promise that the control would continue, but Labour abandoned its promise and abandoned the control, doing its best to conceal from the public what it was up to. In fact, it was a lot worse than that. Decent people who expressed concern about what was going on, and who fully recognised the great contribution made by newcomers over the years but doubted whether we could continue with an almost open door, were branded racists and the Government made every effort to stifle debate.

I do not know precisely why things happened as they did. The Government may have concluded that it was easier to import people to fill vacancies than to take unpopular steps to get back to work the millions of economically inactive people already here. Probably they just allowed the Home Office to become so inefficient and demoralised as to be incapable of operating the control effectively. They allowed it to become, in the words of John Reid, “unfit for purpose”.

Whatever the reason, the control collapsed, and the figures are there to prove it. There should be no room for argument about this. In the 1980s, net immigration was below 50,000 a year and in 1997 it stood at 48,000, but by 2004 it had soared to 586,000. A lot of people left in that year, but even if we take account of the leavers the net number of permanent entrants was an enormous and unprecedented 244,000. The net figure for 2006 was a little lower, but last year it was back to 237,000, even though by then there was a pronounced downward trend in people coming from eastern Europe. I am talking about legal immigration. Like Mr Blunkett, we do not have a clue how many are here illegally, but there must be hundreds of thousands of them because 285,000 failed asylum seekers are unaccounted for.

A few weeks ago there was an outbreak of common sense, but it was very short-lived. Mr Phil Woolas said that there was a need for a cap on immigration and that he would not let Britain’s population go over 70 million. The next day, after, apparently, having received a rocket from the Secretary of State and after a Labour colleague had accused him of “pandering to right-wing extremists”, he recanted. However, he started a debate that will not be so easily stifled this time.

Recently, this House debated a report of the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee and its conclusion that Britain had not benefited from the influx of newcomers over recent years. Even if we reject the committee’s conclusion, we still have to ask ourselves whether in the long run it is really in anybody’s interest for the population of our tiny island to continue to grow at the rate at which it has been growing recently. In October 2007, the Office for National Statistics predicted that Britain’s population, which grew by 2 million between 2001 and 2007, would, with 70 per cent of the increase due to new immigration, surge to 71 million by 2031, 75 million by 2051 and 85 million by 2081, making us by then by far the most densely populated country in Europe.

How will we house these people? What will be left of our countryside when we have done so? Between 1997 and 2005, the last period for which figures are available, no fewer than 592,000 houses were needed solely for new immigrants. According to the Library of the House of Commons, 41 per cent of the 3 million houses that Mr Brown says he is going to have built by 2020 will have to be built only because of the new immigration that is at present forecast—that is, new immigration from now.

According to the CPRE, 3 million more houses by 2020 means our having to lose an area of greenfield land the size of Birmingham to accommodate them. That would be an environmental disaster, but it is one that can still be avoided. We have to stop saying, “X number of people are going to come, so Y number of houses must be built”. Instead, we must ask ourselves whether the vast number of new homes that we are told immigration policies require is not in itself an argument for stemming the flow. If we can bring immigration and emigration into a rough balance—if we can achieve a situation in which those coming match those leaving—the need for additional housing identified in the Barker report will largely be removed.

There is nothing in the gracious Speech that is calculated to achieve a result remotely like this. Let us be clear: the Government’s points system, which places no limit at all on work-related immigration, actually guarantees further immigration growth. How can it be otherwise when, as newcomers fill vacancies, their demand for services creates others? How can it be otherwise when the Government boast of 800,000 jobs being available to non-EU immigrants without their even having to be advertised here? These are not highly skilled jobs, but jobs such as care workers and cooks—not Gordon Ramsays, but people capable of earning £8.20 an hour. How can it be otherwise when the government scheme allows people with skills to come here on spec and then take unskilled work?

There is only one answer, which is an annual limit on non-EU immigration designed to achieve a rough balance between leavers and entrants—the cap on immigration that Mr Woolas advocated. So one or two cheers for Mr Woolas and a plague on his bullying detractors.

—————————————————– can send you email notifications when your favourite, or most despised, politicians speak.

Leave a comment

Filed under Immigration, Labour Lies, Social Engineering

Another call to ban faith schools so that we can enjoy equality, celebrate diversity and live happily ever after

Faith schools should be open to all, regardless of the parents’ faith or lack of it, according to another one of those registered “charities” that advises on social engineering tactics.

It is the usual MO whereby the government decides what is to be “achieved,” in this case, destroying, particularly, the Christian religion, then uses the “advice” given by a registered ‘charity’ funded by other charities and government departments who they know will spin the case for the government.

It is really like asking yourself a question in the mirror, but the public is hoodwinked into believing that the advice is impartial and provided by experts.

Here is the basic argument from the Runnymede Trust with my comments in italics:

Faith schools should be open to all

Runnymede’s latest report ‘Right to Divide?’ examines how faith schools have responded to the statutory duty to promote community cohesion. It recommends:

1. End selection on the basis of faith

Faith schools should be for the benefit of all in society rather than just some. If faith schools are convinced of their relevance for society, then that should apply equally for all children. With state funding comes an obligation to be relevant and open to all citizens.

The last sentence is completely dishonest. Tax-payers’ pounds are doled out by the billion to specific groups. Pensioners get a Winter fuel payment. I don’t. Hardly all-inclusive, diversity-appreciating equality in action. I can afford to heat my home, so I am not complaining.

2. Children should have a greater say in how they are educated

Children’s rights are as important as parents’ rights. While the debate about faith schools is characterized by discussions of parental choice of education, there is little discussion about children’s voice.

And if the child wants to be in a school in which his faith is valued? I bet they weren’t thinking along these lines. Of course the social engineers are trying hard to diminish parental rights by all means, so it is unsurprising that the ‘authorities’ would rather strike up discussions with children and ignore their parents, especially if they can coerce them into worshipping the new three-in-one of equality, diversity and choice.

3. RE should be part of the core national curriculum

Provision for learning about religion is too often poor in schools without a religious character. Provision for learning about religions beyond that of the sponsoring faith in faith schools is also inadequate.

The sweetener. Their side of the bargain is that faith will be given greater significance in state schools, although they don’t say it – just imply it – however, they want a variety of religions to be taught in all schools.

This is only natural in the new world order as it will have the desired effect of diluting faith and therefore its influence corporately and the empowerment that faith gives to individuals to enable them to tackle authority when it goes bad and it is going very bad.

The Almighty gives me wisdom to notice what is going on and the strength to oppose it in some manner at least.

4. Faith schools should also serve the most disadvantaged

Despite histories based on challenging poverty and inequality, and high-level pronouncements that suggest a mission to serve the most disadvantaged in society, faith schools educate a disproportionately small number of young people at the lowest end of the socio-economic scale.

So, for example, Christian couples with a good work ethic and who encourage their children intellectually, spiritually and morally should be penalised simply because “inequality” exists.

Why are faith schools expected to raise people out of poverty by accepting non-believers en masse? New Labour has allegedly been improving the lot of disadvantaged people for over eleven years.

This is a red herring. Like Nero, degenerate rulers will blame everyone but themselves. Good parents seem to be getting tarnished as a danger to society because they don’t spend twenty pounds a night down the pub but would rather give their children a good start in life by being there for them and providing for them.

This is unwelcome behaviour from our masters’ point of view because there are fewer opportunities for their ‘system’ to interfere. Good parents are less likely to be caught in the likes of the benefits and social services trap and the ‘justice’ system.

What must our rulers do? Why, get them into the ‘sexual health’ system: guaranteed to make your child more likely to have sexual relations and have treatment and ‘advice’ behind your back.

What use are faith schools to them? Teaching children to wait until they are married before having sex? That won’t help their friends in the abortion industry.

5. Faith schools must value all young people

People cherish facets of their identities beyond their faith, and these also need to be the focus of learning in faith schools – and valued within them. Similarly, religious identities should be more highly valued within schools that don’t have a religious character.

That’s right. Don’t dare be identified by your faith! Naturally, we humans are multi-faceted by design, but not always in the way the government likes. This is nothing but social engineering in an attempt to make us all alike and all subservient to those who set themselves up as our masters.

The sweetener again is that faith will be “more highly valued” in state schools.

And I’m a monkey’s uncle. Faith will mean whatever they want it to mean.

6. If these recommendations are acted upon, faith should continue to play an important role in our education system

Faith schools should remain a significant and important part of our education system, offering diversity in the schooling system as a means of improving standards, offering choice to parents and developing effective responses to local, national and global challenges in education.

This is a fine piece of doublethink. Parents can have ‘choice’ by being denied the type of school they want. They can have ‘diversity’ even though they don’t want it and ‘local, national and global challenges in education’ can be addressed, whatever that means. It means whatever they want it to.

Page six of the “Right to Divide? Faith Schools and Community Cohesion” report offers further insight to the real agenda:

“Teaching about democracy and citizenship within institutions that are autocratic only serves to demonstrate to young people the double standards of adults. If young people are to develop the ability for critical thinking and selfdetermination, in opposition to absolutist thought and closed approaches to difference, developing appropriate democratic dialogue within schools is necessary.”

This says to me that children will be taught about the politics and morals of a decaying society, to despise the values of their family by accusing them of being hypocrites, in other words, they want children to grow up believing that you cannot serve God and mammon. They are correct, but they want us serving mammon by seeking to reprogramme children and short-circuiting their conscience.

As for state schools encouraging “critical thinking”. Do me a favour.

By the way, government lackeys:

“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Matthew 18:6

Leave a comment

Filed under Education, Labour Lies, Moral Meltdown, Police State, REligion, Social Engineering, UK Politics

Email from Gordon

I received an email from Gordon Brown this afternoon – a mass mailing of course – a dubious reward for subscribing to

My Hotmail account asks: “Mark as safe” or “Mark as unsafe” which had me thinking.

Anyway, you will sleep soundly knowing that the Prime Minister is “taking action to give real help now” and being “focused” on making everything fair, fair and even more fair.

He will meet the “challenges,” but whatever you do, don’t trust the Tories because they “would do nothing to give real help now.”

I could spend a couple of hours critiquing the email, but why bother? You will be doing it yourself as you read; probably accompanied by shaking your head and spluttering in disbelief at how dumb he presumes the average Labour supporter to be.

Email reproduced below (with original typos)

Each and every day we’re taking action to give real help now to help everyone get through this economic downturn fairly.

But as we concentrate on bringing Britain through this downturn, we’re also preparing for a future in which Britain emerges stronger and fairer.

Today’s Queen’s Speech was focused on delivering for you and your family with fair chances, fair rules and a fairer future.

We’ll build a fairer future by doing more to help those affected by this economic downturn from losing their homes through repossession. People will get fair chances through lifelong access to education, training and apprenticeships and an NHS that meets your needs on your terms. And we’ll enforce fair rules so that those who work hard are properly rewarded – and those who try to game the system will face the consequences.

The challenges we must meet in today’s Queen’s Speech have already changed f rom those we faced a year ago. We are living in a new age – one where nothing is more important than helping you to protect your job, your house and your savings.

The Conservatives would do nothing to give real help now to families and businesses. It is no accident that they have chosen this course – it is the same unfair Conservative instinct that abandoned people, families and communities to sink or swim in the 1980s and 1990s.

Our Party has always been about the many and not the few – and this Queen’s Speech is about a fairer future for all, not just some.

As I said on Saturday, this is the biggest New Labour project of all – giving people the confidence and hope that we can get through this downturn and build the fair society.

Our test is to whether we can give real help to people on middle and modest incomes now, while making the right long term decisions to prepare and equip our country for the future.

With your continue d help and support, I know that we will bring Britain though this downturn to emerge stronger and fairer than ever before.

With thanks and best wishes Gordon

PS – I have recorded an online video on our plans outlined in the Queens Speech – you can be among the first to watch it by clicking here now

1 Comment

Filed under Labour Lies, UK Politics