Alex Ellis Roswell LPUK

Tax Cuts, Not HS2

2012-01-27T12:17:00.006Z

HS2 will cut journey times between the North and London, allowing more people to commute, thus helping the economy of the North.

It will cut journey times between Birmingham and London, but let's put this in to perspective. We're talking about 2026- 14 years away. Virgin Trains have said they estimate their train service between Birmingham and London will be only 11 minutes slower than HS2 in 2026. Things progress a long way in 14 years! Today we have technology that allows us to communicate to anyone, anywhere in the world. I honestly don't believe our imagination can fully understand what technology will be around in 2026, making our world ever smaller.

Will such large numbers of people really still be commuting daily across the UK? The current trend is for companies to allow employees to work more and more from home as technology progresses- a good thing for productivity, traffic issues and the environment.

Demand for domestic flights is decreasing, journey times between the UK's major cities is faster than most of our European neighbours... there just really isn't the need (or the available funds) to build this new high speed rail network.

I'm all for economic growth in the North- it says a lot about where our politicians priorities lie when we consider how long the North has suffered with a lack of growth, compared to London and the South East. You've got to be naive or plain stupid to think HS2 will do any good for the economy of the North.

The £32 billion that this project will cost will be funded predominately by taxing the poor. Will the poor be using HS2 do you think? I doubt it. Travel on the railways is expensive as it is, with many being forced off. I can't imagine travelling on the new high speed network will be anything but expensive. I don't see how a dinner lady from Tooting would benefit or even be remotely effected by HS2, other than her tax going up in order to pay for it.

What would create growth now and for the future, in a more sustainable way that won't leave a snake of destruction through some of England's most beautiful countryside is giving individuals a tax break. A £500 tax break for every tax payer in the UK.

This scheme won't effect the Government's budgets any more than building HS2. What it will do though is give power directly to the individuals who need economic growth in their communities. Rather than take people's money in the form of tax to build a transport link that will benefit predominantly wealthy commuters, let's allow everyone (even the poor) to spend their money how they want.

Tweet your thoughts to: @Alex_E_R

Or Subscribe: www.facebook.com/alexellisroswell

Stop HS2

HS2 Action Alliance

Yes to High Speed Rail

HS2 Ltd

Free Britain February/ March 2011

2011-03-07T20:43:00.003Z

Click on the front cover above, or here to read February/ March 2011 edition of Free Britain, featuring an article by me titled "The Angry Generation".

You can follow Campaign for an Independent Britain via:

Twitter
Facebook

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #1 Leave the EU

2011-02-06T16:38:00.003Z

George Osborne has been put in charge of cutting the national deficit, so how hard can it be to knock a few £’s here and there off the budget? Over the next 5 days I will attempt to lop a few billion off the UK national deficit. I am not an economist, nor hold any qualifications to allow me to be one. But how hard can it really be?

I will be tackling 5 massive and polarising issues in this series so feedback and debate is welcomed and encouraged!

Tuesday: Scrap International Aid
Wednesday: Withdraw Troops from Conflict
Thursday: Legalise Drugs and Prostitution
Friday: Cut Tax
Saturday: Leave the EU

Brainwave #1 Leave the EU
Amount saved: £7 billion per year + £50 billion per year estimated net cost to UK economy per year

First I would like to apologise for the fact that this last part of the 5 part series has come a day late due to yesterday’s somewhat hectic events. But I’ve left the best till last.

The European Union- despised by the many, adored by the few. With the UK giving £7 billion every year in a membership fee to the European Union, it is quite possible this is the most expensive gentlemen’s club in the whole world. Full of ageing ex-politicians and failed political personalities ranging from Communist to Fascist backgrounds, let it be known that this is not a pleasant gentlemen’s club to belong to. What’s worse is we don’t get a choice in our membership and the benefits are hardly generous to you or me.

They bribe us with their special grants and shiny blue signs outside of redevelopments stating “Funded by The European Union” while in reality they are undemocratically stealing billions from us tax payers. They tell us where we can and can’t import from, what we can and can’t import, how much we can and can’t import, what we can and can’t fish, when we can and can’t fish, who we can and can’t allow to vote, how we can and can’t protect citizens from foreign law, how we can and can’t protect our environment, how we can and can’t regulate our private sector and so on and so forth.

The hundreds of thousands of pages of EU legislation, written and debated in Brussels and Strasbourg, have had a huge negative impact on our own economy and civil liberties while at the same time causing a negative, and in some circumstances devastating, impact on the wider world.

Our environment has suffered, our farmers have suffered, our relations with the commonwealth and the third world have suffered, our small businesses have suffered, our post offices have suffered, our

rural communities have suffered, our democratic processes have suffered, our liberties and freedoms have suffered and our economy has suffered.

So who has benefitted? The only one’s benefitting from all this are the rich fat cats who run the shots around Europe.

Why are we still in the EU if it is so bad for the UK? Because the rich fat cats like being rich fat cats.

The UK must immediately and permanently withdraw it’s membership from the European Union and focus on rebuilding key trade links with countries such as India and developing regions such as Africa. We must look at the world, not through British glasses or European glasses, but through global glasses. We live in a global world where 21st century communications have thrown all the old ways of doing business out the door and onto the street.

Let’s keep our money, keep our parliament and democracy and start trading with the world.

Total Deficit Cut: £74.7billion (+increased work force, + the end of British soldiers injured and killed, + 1000’s of new jobs, + increased tourism, + even more jobs, + further private investment, + higher productivity, + increased democracy, + stronger foreign trade, + better civil liberties)

It goes without saying that the above figure is a very crude figure and is a mere estimate from someone with relatively little economics knowledge. The figure in reality may turn out to be far less, or far more (either way we will probably never find out). Please don’t sue me.

Please feel free to leave abuse/ constructive criticism/ support. I hope you have enjoyed reading the series, or at least some of it. Thank you!

Written for Political Pundits

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #2 Cut Tax

2011-02-04T19:59:00.005Z

George Osborne has been put in charge of cutting the national deficit, so how hard can it be to knock a few £’s here and there off the budget? Over the next 5 days I will attempt to lop a few billion off the UK national deficit. I am not an economist, nor hold any qualifications to allow me to be one. But how hard can it really be?

I will be tackling 5 massive and polarising issues in this series so feedback and debate is welcomed and encouraged!

Tuesday: Scrap International Aid
Wednesday: Withdraw Troops from Conflict
Thursday: Legalise Drugs and Prostitution
Friday: Cut Tax
Saturday: Leave the EU

Brainwave #2 Cut Tax
Amount raised: £Unknown

It is easy to tax the rich. Heck, it’s even easier to tax the poor. But just because something is available and easy to do, should we do it? If someone sitting near you on a train gets up to go and leaves their wallet on their chair would you not say anything and take it once they’ve gone or would you tell them they’ve left their wallet behind? It would be easy to say nothing, wait for them to go and then pocket their wallet. But it wouldn’t be the right thing to do.

Sure the UK could tax everyone in the country even higher than current levels, but it wouldn’t be the right thing to do for a number of reasons. Firstly, I believe it is quite immoral to tax anyone’s labour and time. The fruits of your labour, your wage, are not something that should be available to anyone else, George Osborne included. Unfortunately we do have income tax worldwide and I don’t see that changing in my lifetime.

Next we have the economic argument for why higher taxing will not increase income in the longer scheme of things. The more you tax something, the less desirable it becomes. Tobacco is a fine example of how tax can alter behaviour among citizens. Every year successive governments increase the excise duty on tobacco and cigarettes and every year more and more smokers are giving up the habit. This works with labour as well. The more you take from someone’s effort, the less effort they are likely to put into it. Less effort means less potential tax earnings for the exchequer.

So it may seem like a queer idea at first to lower tax to cut the deficit, but really it is quite a simple formula. In countries like Estonia where they have moved to a flat rate income tax system the Government has been collecting so much money, they have had to keep cutting tax each year. The current income tax rate in Estonia stands at 22%.

Boris Johnson is just one of many politicians and commentators who have called for the government to lower taxes to increase economic development and growth. Raising tax is just an easy way to cut the deficit in the short term. The government should be more visionary than that, looking at creative ways of expanding and growing our private economy while at the same time protecting essential services for all.

I won’t be adding a definitive figure on the total at the end because quite simply, to my knowledge, there isn’t a single economist out there who can truly predict the financial benefit of a tax cut. Instead I will add the knock on consequences of a tax cut, including increased jobs, further private investment and overall higher productivity. Tomorrow’s brainwave should go a long way in cutting the deficit and regaining economic and individual freedom.

It was government spending and borrowing that dragged us into this mess and it will be private investment and enterprise that will lead us out.

Total Deficit Cut So Far: £17.7billion (+increased work force, + the end of British soldiers injured and killed, + 1000’s of new jobs, + increased tourism, + even more jobs, + further private investment, + higher productivity)

Please feel free to leave abuse/ constructive criticism/ support, and I hope you get the opportunity to read tomorrow’s deficit busting brainwave #1!

Written for Political Pundits

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #3 Legalise Drugs and Prostitution

2011-02-03T17:44:00.006Z

George Osborne has been put in charge of cutting the national deficit, so how hard can it be to knock a few £’s here and there off the budget? Over the next 5 days I will attempt to lop a few billion off the UK national deficit. I am not an economist, nor hold any qualifications to allow me to be one. But how hard can it really be?

I will be tackling 5 massive and polarising issues in this series so feedback and debate is welcomed and encouraged!

Tuesday: Scrap International Aid
Wednesday: Withdraw Troops from Conflict
Thursday: Legalise Drugs and Prostitution
Friday: Cut Tax
Saturday: Leave the EU

Brainwave #3 Legalise Drugs and Prostitution
Amount raised: £7.5 billion per year

There is a colossal opportunity for economic growth when it comes to the UK drugs market and sex industry. Through legalisation and regulation the UK could become a global destination for European, American and Asian travellers in search of a legal high and 5 minutes of pleasure. I believe the UK is in a much better position than destinations such as Amsterdam when it comes to “drug and sex tourism” thanks to our world class, international image and existing links with Asia and America.

There is a very real human cost to drugs and sex legislation that must always be a part of the debate. I have written in the past about these human costs and impacts which can be read here. I will focus on the economic benefits of legalisation in this article, but let it be known I have in the past, and will carry on in the future, writing about the human impacts of our current legislation and the benefits of legalisation.

Whenever we talk about the drugs market or sex industry, we talk about huge numbers. Unfortunately due to their underground nature it is so hard to find trustworthy sources of information in regards to the size and economics of these industries. The Independent Drug Monitoring Unit did however publish a very interesting and highly researched piece in October of 2004 on the economics of the UK drugs market. Their research found the total size of the market was worth up to £6.5 billion per year.

If the drugs market in the UK were to be legalised and properly regulated this £6.5 billion of circulating cash would instantly be available to George Osborne and his department in the form of excise duty and VAT. But it doesn’t stop there!

The growing, distributing and retailing of these newly legalised substances will also have a dramatic impact on tax receipts. With legalisation we will see tens of thousands of new jobs created, all tax paying and wage spending individuals. It is quite an exciting prospect that an entirely new industry could enter the legal market.

The Independent Drug Monitoring Unit calculated that from the £6.5 billion industry, total tax receipts would come to £4 billion. That on its own is enough to wipe a considerable amount off of the national deficit. What also needs to be added to this equation is the impact on police spending. It is a surprising challenge to find hard figures for how much of the policing budget actually goes on drug prohibition related crime. The report by IDMU found that after taking all costs into account, legalisation would have a net benefit of £6.5 billion to the exchequer every year. It should be remembered this report was made in 2004, and it is understood drug use has dramatically increased since then, with an estimated 3.5 million UK citizens smoking cannabis on a regular basis.

This leaves us with the sex industry, which is even harder to find figures on! Estimates point towards the UK having 100,000 sex workers with an estimated yearly value of £1 billion. As with a legalised drugs market; legalised prostitution would have a positive economic effect on a wide range of other industries. A report by the British Medical Journal found that 9% of British men pay for sex and yet very little of the money they pay will find its way to the exchequer through tax. The money that 9% of men pay into the industry is more likely to end up in the pockets of international drug and human traffickers.

It is really difficult to say how much the economy could benefit from a legalised and regulated sex industry, but if we use the same formula that the IDMU used on drug legalisation we come to a figure of around £1 billion. This figure takes into consideration the tax receipts of sex workers, brothels and related businesses and also how much police funding currently goes towards fighting the sex industry, its workers and some of the shady characters that currently hold the power.

When we add the tax raised from a legalised drugs market and sex industry, we reach the figure of £7.5 billion per year- money that would otherwise never find its way to George Osborne.

Total Deficit Cut So Far: £17.7billion (+increased work force, + the end of British soldiers injured and killed, + 1000’s of new jobs, + increased tourism)

Please feel free to leave abuse/ constructive criticism/ support, and I hope you get the opportunity to read tomorrow’s deficit busting brainwave #2!

Written for Political Pundits

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #4 Withdraw Troops from Conflict

2011-02-02T17:16:00.006Z

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #5 Scrap International Aid

2011-02-01T16:29:00.008Z

George Osborne has been put in charge of cutting the national deficit, so how hard can it be to knock a few £’s here and there off the budget? Over the next 5 days I will attempt to lop a few billion off the UK’s national deficit. I am not an economist, nor hold any qualifications to allow me to be one. But how hard can it really be?

I will be tackling 5 massive and polarising issues in this series so feedback and debate is welcomed and encouraged!

Tuesday: Scrap International Aid
Wednesday: Withdraw Troops from Conflict
Thursday: Legalise Drugs and Prostitution
Friday: Cut Tax
Saturday: Leave the EU

Brainwave #5 Scrap International Aid
Amount Saved: £5.2 billion per year

International aid is not charity; nor is it good, benevolent, helpful or saintly. International aid is instead a tangled web of power grabbing, back room deal making and money making elite. This tangled web covers the whole globe linking governments, and their leaders, together. Those who most benefit have made it an almost unthinkable proposition to scrap our participation in this activity. Instantly you become someone who doesn’t care or know of the hardships of third world poverty.

However supporters of international aid are unfortunately quite misguided in their beliefs. For international aid does not help the starving orphan in Ethiopia or the malaria infected mother in Cameroon quite as much as is being stated. Huge swathes of aid money is being diverted towards government officials, oil rich states and countries with industry that is of great interest to our own. Until quite recently the UK tax payer was flooding money into nations such as Russia and China, seeming to benefit the industrial kings and political queens of the world more than the billions of poverty stricken humans.

Many would argue that even after factoring in the “cost” of corruption and bribery, the international aid bill of £5.2 billion every year is still a worthy cause that must be protected in the face of spending cuts. No. There are better ways of helping the least fortunate in our world. It doesn’t include corruption, bribery, special interests, governments or tax.

Now I’m sure readers of this who may lean slightly to the right of politics have been nodding their heads ferociously so far but I may be about to disappoint.

Here is the catch: A more efficient, helpful and charitable way of helping those most in need from other nations is to make it easier for them to work in our own nation.

I probably just lost a good 60% of readers. 50% have clicked the back button on their browser, the other 10% are scrolling down to leave comments on how utterly mad I and my views are.

The idea is that the best way out of poverty is not a cheque every year but a solid road towards bettering oneself. By making it easier for those in struggling nations to come and work in our nation, boosting our own productivity and economy, you allow them to better themselves and once leaving, bettering their homeland with earned money in their pocket and new knowledge of democracy, human rights and business in their head.

I am conscious not to turn this into a piece about immigration, but obviously the policies surrounding migrants from these nations would have to be well thought out and planned, unlike Labour’s policies on immigration. The benefits of allowing individuals to earn in this country and take their wages back to their homeland are huge both for their families and communities and for our own economy. Certainly there are negatives of mass exodus of poverty stricken lands; policies would need to be very thoughtful of this.

There are cases where economic migration simply would not be enough to pull communities out of poverty or indeed an impossible ask. For this we have the likes of Christian Aid and thousands of other charitable organisations like them who really and genuinely do make such a positive impact on the lives of so many people. Charities in the UK I feel often don’t get enough credit for what work they really do. They are either being patronised on one side by the Government giving them hand outs, or attacked on the other by the man on the street who doesn’t want to keep seeing starving children on his TV during the ad breaks of Coronation Street.

The UK already gives a huge amount to private charity, especially in comparison with other countries like ours, but you can’t blame ordinary families in this country who are struggling financially to give away even more of their precious weekly income. I feel my brainwave #2 which will be released on Friday will help towards encouraging families, businesses and individuals to give a bit more to charities at home and abroad.

We have a direct interest in how the rest of the world is developing; blindly giving billions in aid every year feels to me like we are just brushing this huge issue under the carpet, hoping that our wealth will solve all the problems of the world. Well here is a conundrum for all you supporters of government aid: why is third world poverty still such a huge problem, prematurely killing hundreds of millions of children, mothers and fathers every year?

Total Deficit Cut So Far: £5.2billion (+increased work force)

Please feel free to leave abuse/ constructive criticism/ support, and I hope you get the opportunity to read tomorrow’s deficit busting brainwave #4!

Written for Political Pundits

Egyptian Revolution

2011-01-30T19:34:00.004Z

It's just a short update today, I have an interesting 5 part series about the deficit coming next week (if everything goes to plan). The following is a short but cleverly editted video showing some of the scenes from the uprisings in Egypt. Some of the words said in this video are genuinely moving. I think it really does put our recent protests to shame. These people, a nation of 80 million people, are fighting for such basic and fundamental rights that we in this country think nothing of.

Enjoy and share!

We can learn so much from Sweden's forests

2011-01-22T15:53:00.004Z

I spent much of my mid-teens working in local forests. I want to see Britain’s forests protected and cared for as much as anyone else. However, I do object to misguided scaremongering dogma by certain organisations and political groups surrounding the privatisation of our forests.

We all need to get out of this bizarre mind set that Government can keep spending vast amounts of our money on nonessential projects that benefit a very small group of people. The figure Kent Messenger used last week was that it only cost 30p per person to manage The Forestry Commission. I would personally rather keep my 30p and let enterprising, environmentally aware businesses and individuals manage the forests properly and efficiently.

Cyclists, ramblers, dog walkers, horse riders and other forest users do have the right to be concerned about DEFRA’s proposals and I believe their forestry use must be taken into consideration when acting upon these proposals. If these proposals are undertaken in a thoroughly thought out manner I see no reason why we should not all be celebrating the privatisation plans!

Sweden is a fine example of how privately owned forests can be a benefit to everyone. 78% of Sweden is covered in forests, compared to an embarrassing 10% in Britain. Sweden has some of the most beautiful and best managed forests in Europe and yet what may surprise many readers is the Government only owns and manages a tiny 5% of this forested land. Wood is one of Sweden’s main exports, employing a vast amount of people across the whole country.

As well as the forests being a hub of economic and environmental activity, Sweden also enjoys some of the best forest access rights anywhere in the world. Swedish law states that regardless of who owns the land, everyone is entitled to hike through the natural landscape and to pick mushrooms and berries that grow there. This right of common access is taken very seriously by Swedish citizens and is respected by all land owners.

If done correctly and thoughtfully to the needs of all forest users, the privatisation of UK forests could wield so many benefits to the environment and economy creating many 100s of new jobs locally while protecting the right of access.

Further Reading: Adam Smith Institute on Privatising Forests

Blueprint for a Safe, Enterprising and Modern UK Sex Industry

2011-01-20T21:10:00.003Z

You cannot legislate against a problem to make it go away. It won’t go anywhere. Like with so many things in the UK, and indeed the world, so many of society’s problems have simply been legislated against and then forgotten about. From animal cruelty to drug abuse, they have all been legislated against with very little concern for the human lives involved and affected by such legislation.

Sexual abuse towards sex workers in the UK is one prime example of a societal problem that has been legislated against without concern for the human lives involved. I have written in the past about the awful dangers UK prostitutes are in every working day of their lives. I intend to show how this “problem” can be turned into an opportunity. An opportunity to better the lives of all UK prostitutes and an opportunity to show the world the benefits of a safe regulated sex industry.

There are estimated to be around 100,000 people in the UK engaged with prostitution. A recent investigation by Poppy Project found that there were 921 brothels in the 33 London boroughs alone with an estimated collective yearly income of £50million-£130million. A huge proportion of this money is lost in the depths of international criminal organisations, helping to fund such things as human trafficking and drug smuggling.

To create the safe, enterprising and modern sex industry that the UK and all UK sex workers deserve we must take the power away from those criminals who currently pull the strings in the industry. Through legalisation and sensible regulation power will swiftly move from criminal bosses to sex workers, legal enterprising individuals and communities.

Many on the extreme ends of Libertarianism may shout me down for promoting regulation as a worthy cause in regards to the sex industry but I have reasons. The current problem is where the power lies; currently dangerous criminals. If legalisation were to come into effect, with no regulation, I see no way in which criminals like human traffickers would be thrown out of the industry. Quite simply you would achieve nothing but government approving criminals and their “establishments”. The industry needs a huge shake up of power, a shift towards putting the sex workers lives first.

I have used the word sensible regulation, but this can mean many different things to many different people. Some may believe sensible regulation within the sex industry means Government-Private partnerships, set hourly wages and advertising bans while others would just favour local planning regulations.

My definition of sensible regulation for the UK sex industry is as follows:

Sex Workers

All sex workers to be over 18 years of age
This one seems obvious enough. However in many countries with legalised and regulated sex industry’s they have a 21+ rule for all sex workers. I feel this overzealous regulation on age can leave many older teenage sex workers in the black market and in the hands of organised crime. That is why I propose anyone over the age of 18 years be free to engage in the industry.

Of sound mental judgement
This simple regulation makes a lot of sense in making sure those most vulnerable in our society are not taken advantage of by employers and customers.

In procession of a passport or proof of eligibility to work in the UK
Instantly wipe out a huge proportion of human trafficking by making it impossible to operate as a legal prostitute in the UK without proof of eligibility. This proof should be made available to any customer who seeks it.

Customers

To be over 18 years of age
In line with the universal age and other UK age restrictions.

No Condom? No Entry!
This single piece of regulation will do more to give power and safety to sex workers than any other.

Brothels

Common Sense Local Planning Permission
Currently the 921 brothels in London have no planning permission. They are more likely to have planning permission to be “massage parlours, dance clubs or saunas”. Some aren’t even in commercial premises and are instead in residential flats and streets surrounded by unknowing families and pensioners. Planning permission would have to be the responsibility of the local council and it’s community. However this does cause a significant problem in the form of NIMBY-ism (NotInMyBackYard). If councils and communities become too negative towards new legal brothels in their area nothing would have been achieved by legalising it, as it will once again sink into the criminal world with dodgy massage parlours springing up instead. A balance must be found.

Record of Workers
A record of who is working within the brothel is a necessity. This links in with workers having to have proof of eligibility to work in the UK. There are many different ways of running a legal brothel however. Almost all Dutch brothels do not actually directly employ the workers and instead lease out rooms. The workers are legally self-employed and are therefore responsible for their own paper work. Nonetheless I believe it should be up to the establishment owner to prove sex workers working on their premises are eligible to work in the UK and are over 18.

Legalising and regulating this controversial industry will not make the problems of human trafficking, exploitation and sexual abuse disappear. However it will go a long way in allowing sex workers to come out of the dark and into the legal world of employment and enterprise. The only way to help and support these workers is to bring them out of illegality.

Cameron, Clegg and Osborne sitting in a tree V.A.T.T.I.N.G.

2011-01-04T20:29:00.003Z

But in all seriousness... what a bunch of right-wing, millionaire, silver spoon fed, clueless cretins.

David Cameron, April 2010: We have absolutely no plans to raise VAT. Our first budget is all about recognising we need to get spending under control rather than putting up tax.

David Cameron, May 2009: You could try, as you say, to put it on VAT, sales tax, but again if you look at the effect of sales tax, it's very regressive, it hits the poorest the hardest. It does, I absolutely promise you. Any sales tax, anything that goes on purchases that you make in shops tends to . . . if you look at it, where VAT goes now it doesn't go on food obviously but it goes very, very widely and VAT is a more regressive tax than income tax or council tax.

Nick Clegg, April 2010: We will not have to raise VAT to deliver our promises. The Conservatives will. Let me repeat that: Our plans do not require a rise in VAT. The Tory plans do.

And so the back pedaling and digging begins with both Liberal Democrats and Conservatives both going back on what they promised not to do at the 2010 general election. Their excuse? The deficit is worse than they thought. Absolute garbage. The deficit is staggeringly and dangerously huge, yes, however they knew full well what financial situation they were being elected into last year. This is a political decision and not an economic decision.

I was speaking to a friend who owns a small, independent shop yesterday about if this VAT increase will effect him. He laughed and told me it was a silly question to ask. He then looked me very seriously in the eyes and told me just what this will do to him and his business. Because his small shop sells very low priced items, and is directly competing with the newly opened supermarket on his high street, he simply doesn't have the opportunity to raise his prices. His solution? Sack the one person he employs, swallow the VAT increase and take on the extra hours himself.

That is one more regular user for the local Job Centre, which seems to be the best performing 'business' locally at the moment.

Happy New Year to you too Cameron, Clegg and Osborne.

My Top 5 of 2010

2011-01-02T17:00:00.010Z

This is my 55th post, the time is 5 o'clock GMT and it's a new year! What better time then to show you my top 5 posts, according to me, of 2010. I hope you all had a special and peaceful Christmas and a cracking New Year.

5

The BNP are just UKIP in jeans
I kicked the year 2010 off by royally pissing off an awful lot of people in UKIP by standing firmly and publicly against Lord Pearson's prehistoric attitude towards Islam. All ended well though; I hopped over to The Libertarian Party, the local media got interested in what I was saying and UKIP performed surprisingly average in May's general election.

4

Presenting you with Mao Ze Brown
I know it can be easy for it to seem like a distant nightmare, but here is the truth: The Labour Party were in power in this country just under 12 months ago. No, the current bunch aren't much better than the last. But I beg anyone who has a short-term memory, especially you angry students, before selling your soul to the red team, please please PLEASE read this post and try to remember what blatent and unforgivable attacks The Labour Party did on our liberty, rights and freedom!

3

Can I please change generations?
2010 was the year that civil unrest became cool again. Everyone's at it! Apart from me that is.

2

This Is Why Young People Don't Vote!
I was tempted to leave this one out in fear that I would either be promoting this shockingly awful video anymore than was needed or that quite simply it would utterly ruin your New Year. I'm sorry but encouraging young people to at least take some sort of passing interest in politics is quite high up there in my political ambitions, right next to solving global poverty and saving the polar bears. Therefore I must urge you to watch the video, read the post and realise how utterly patronised my generation is when it comes to politics.

1

My Top 5 Libertarian Songs
Now we've had all the political bore, let's finish this top 5 of 2010 list off with a bit of philosophical 'fun' with a healthy dose of music. I give you my top 5 libertarian songs! The Kinks - 20th Century Man topping this particular top 5 list with it's thought provoking and increasingly truthful lyrics including "Got no privacy. Got no liberty. 'Cos the 20th century people took it all away from me". Enjoy!

I hope 2011 brings you all the success and happiness you deserve. Happy New Year!

Claire Khaw UNCOVERED

2010-12-30T10:19:00.013Z

Many warned me against writing this post. I was told I would be giving her the attention she craves. I was told this woman should be ignored in the hope she may one day disappear. The chances are you have probably at one time or another come across this lady if you are a regular follower of certain forums, blogs or political facebook pages. The chances are you brushed her off as a political disaster after reading any one or more of her "radical opinions".

Even after all this online notoriety I have yet to see any proper, thought out dialogue between her and a writer, an interview of sorts. The only third party articles and posts about her are either damning one way slagging matches or brown nosing agreement and justification of her actions and opinions. This is why I decided to actually sit down and spend some time, virtually, with the Khawanator.

I wanted to see why Khaw held some of the more extreme views that she holds. I wanted to ckarify some of the things it has been reported she has said in the past. I wanted to see what it is that makes Khaw tick.

What I found out from our short and civil exchange is that Claire Khaw accepted her BNP membership because "she thought it would be rude to refuse", she believes there is nothing wrong with holding a referendum on the reintroduction of slavery and public executions, she really does insist that she is a Libertarian and she is in fact, despite the many rumours, a real life person and not an elaborate internet hoax.

INTERVIEW 28 December 2010:

ELLIS-ROSWELL: What is your background and what brought you to the UK?

KHAW: I am from Malaysia and I came to the UK to go to boarding school.

E-R: And you were a member of the BNP? Is that not contradicting to your non-anglo background?

K: I was invited to join and I received my membership card in March 2010.

E-R: You have nothing else to say in regards to your BNP membership being hypocritical in the opinion of some people?

K: How is being a member of the BNP being hypocritical? They invited me to join and I thought it would be rude to refuse. Also, it now gives me the superb opportunity of being associated with them and standing up for free speech and freedom of association, ie. defending their right to exclude me from their party if that is what they wish.

E-R: Some may say it is hypocritical to belong to an organisation which would, if given the chance, forcibly remove you from your home.

K: The BNP only propose voluntary repatriation, ie. bribing non-whites to go "home". I don't find this proposal at all threatening. Indeed, if things got so bad that the BNP came into power, I would be quite happy to take the proposed sum of £50,000 to go.

E-R: How would you sum up your political beliefs?

K: My political beliefs are libertarian: fewer laws, lower taxes but with a minimum of morality. The Koran is a good source of moral guidance, in my opinion. The New Testament is too vague and The Old Testament is too harsh.

E-R: You have applied for to The Libertarian Party I believe? What has been the problem with that?

K: I have declared an interest in joining The Libertarian Party but am aware that the current rules would not permit me to join as I am a member of the BNP. It seems counter productive for a fledgling party to insist on absolute loyalty when it has so little to offer. I would join if allowed to do so by the rules, however.

E-R: Would you not considor resigning your BNP membership in order to become a member of The Libertarian Party? What is holding you back from defecting? Were you also aware that anyone, of any political colours, can become a party supporter? If you did become a Libertarian Party member and were elected leader, as I believe you planned on trying, what would be your first three acts as party leader?

K: I will considor resigning my BNP membership when I am leader of The Libertarian Party. The BNP gives me a certain notoriety, while The Libertarian Party would consign me to political oblivion. If I became leader I would:
1- Propose that all policies of The Libertarian Party become promises to hold referenda if elected.
2- Propose changes in the constitution recommending that all Libertarian Party members join other parties to spread the libertarian message.
3- Promise that all promises in The Libertarian Party manifesto involve repealing an Act of Parliament.

E-R: You are also the founder of "One Party For All" which believes in a one party state. Ben Woodhams claims that among other policies you would: "reintroduce slavery, make bastardy a disgrace, reintroduce public executions and reintroduce public floggings". Are these claims correct?

K: I see no harm in promising to hold referenda on those subjects and also promising to abide by the decision of the majority, whatever it is.

E-R: I struggle to see how a libertarian could ever stand by and allow enslavements, execusions and floggings. However, we shall move on. You have found notoriety online through being banned on Mumsnet and more recently the Facebook page of the BBC Today programme. Do you enjoy your notoriety? There have been accusations that in fact you are a very elaborate and clever online hoax. This leaves me to ask quite simply- Claire, are you a real person?

K: Many people have had the pleasure of meeting me. Notoriety is necessary to becoming the celebrity I hope to be, as soon as possible. Time is short and the situation may already be irretrievable.

E-R: In what way would you like to be a celebrity? Do you imagine yourself on the big screen in Hollywood one day?

K: As a philosopher, polemicist, writer and someone who knows all the answers. One of my more ambitious projects is creating a new state religion to replace the Anglican Church. I am really not interested in Hollywood at all.

E-R: Thank you so much for taking the time out of your Bank Holiday to answer a few of my questions. Are there any last words of wisdom you would like to share?

K: Just this: The free speech of the people whose views you dislike is your free speech too! People seem to have forgotten Voltaire's words: "I disagree with what you say but would defend to the death your right to say it." The way things are this would appear to need more than a few gentle reminders. That is why I have taken the extreme step of joining the BNP to make this point.

Some of her views may be mad, bad and vile but Claire Khaw is not a serious threat in British politics. In my opinion she is a nice enough person, who unfortunately is a bit too in love with the spot light. I personally feel that she adds a different shade to many online debates on free speech and liberty. But that is all she will ever be. One small shade to an online debate. I just hope the Libertarian Party holds onto it's rules on membership, the BNP can keep her.

Fresh Enthusiasm for South East Libertarians

2010-12-01T19:26:00.004Z

Andy Janes was elected South East Coordinator at Saturday's Libertarian Party AGM. Andy seems a great person with bags of enthusiasm, energy and fresh ideas for the Libertarian movement down our neck of the woods- just what we need! I deeply hope his plans for more local interaction further down into Kent and to the South coast come into fruition and ofcourse, he has my full support. I look forward to working with him over the coming months, helping to get Libertarian candidates onto ballot papers and winning votes from the many thousands of disillusioned Kent voters!

I present to you Andy Janes, Libertarian Party South East Coordinator:

"First off I’d like to thank Alex for inviting me to post here. He asked me my thoughts on the current state of the Libertarian Party; it's future and my plans as the new South East coordinator.

As it stands I think the party has been a bit moribund the past few months, but hopefully with the change in leadership I think things will start to pick up again. As we all have real lives and aren’t professional politicians it is hard to find the time to keep the momentum going. The biggest challenges we face are in reversing the decline in membership, and funding. Therefore our focus for the next year should be on recruitment and raising our profile.

Starting as soon as possible I'd like to have leafleting sessions throughout towns and cities in the South East. Twice in the past month I’ve seen the Socialist Party leafleting in my town centre, we should take a leaf out of their book. Following on from this I want to start monthly meetups in these towns where people who have just heard of us can come and find out more. As I live in Chatham and work in London it is easier for me to focus on these areas, but I am willing to head further a field if members want to have a recruitment event in their town.

Following on from this, once we have a core group of half a dozen activists in each area I really want to work on getting county level branches organised, in anticipation of fielding candidates in next May’s local elections. Ideally I’d like to have at least one candidate for each county council, and a few more down at the city and borough level

As for the future of the party, I want us to be out there making a moral case for limited government and our other core ideas. The current government isn't doing us any favours by presenting the cuts as being done as a necessity and not making the arguments for why a smaller state is desirable. That is what we should be doing, I foresee come 2015 there will be a major realignment of the Tory and lib dems and want us to be ready to form the core of a grouping of classical liberals, libertarians and so on. To do this we will need to be organised and have a positive message based on why freedom, personal choices and responsibility are better than statist solutions."

It seems now is the perfect time to join or become a supporter of The Libertarian Party!

Andrew Withers Elected New Leader

2010-11-29T20:36:00.003Z

Andrew Withers was elected the new leader of The Libertarian Party at Saturday's Party Conference in London. In my experience Andrew has been one of the easiest and most professional people to communicate with in The Libertarian Party. In my opinion the party has been left to him in a run down state and if he is to succeed in regaining members and activists he must have support from current members. Personally he has my support and best wishes.

His Acceptance Speech:

I would like to thank the Party for the confidence that it has shown in me in electing me unopposed. It is with regret that I cannot take up the post until we have resolved the the extraordinary decision by the Secretary of State Dr Vince Cable on the 12th November 2010 that he objects to me being Party Leader, Treasurer or Tea-boy in the Libertarian Party.

In his eyes I am unfit to do so without supervision from his department. Mr Cable was given until 4pm yesterday via his solicitors Osborne Clarke, to withdraw his extraordinary objection from the Bristol District Registry, as he has no powers in Law over the Libertarian Party according to both his own Counsel and Counsel that has volunteered its time on behalf of the Party. I have to tell you no such undertaking has been received, to use a phrase.

All that was received was a letter that informed me yesterday, it was up to me to withdraw this from the Court, being a very simple person I did not understand the logic of this. I was instructed by a District Judge to include all of the organisations here,in America, in South Africa, in France that I am an executive member of. This includes charitable, political, blogs etc etc. Vince Cable's boys just objected to the lot without fear or favour on the 12th November.

Liam Fox MP, my local MP asked to be kept informed of all developments following his attempts to get Mandelson and now Vince Cable to drop this sorry saga after nearly five years. Incredibly my friends, the District Judge ordered a telephone conference to be heard on Dec 3rd to settle the issues at dispute. Vince's boys so far have objected to the telephone conference call, and refused to comply with another Court Order. As a party that believes in the supremacy of the rule of law, it is only right and proper that we await the directions of the Court on December 3rd, and that Vince Cable explains to the Court the reasons why on grounds of national security, public safety or in the interests of democracy he can overturn the will of members of the Libertarian Party and Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

I will remain Leader Designate.

Why are we here, a very small band of Libertarians formed into a party that will never in my lifetime seize office under this benighted system called Parliamentary Democracy.
We are here because we are right in philosophy. In 1989 the Berlin Wall came down because Stalinism and Communism had had its day and people wanted freedom, the banking crash built on a mountain of public debt has brought an end to bureaucratic socialism and public and private debt as a way of life.

Now is the age of Liberty, but it is going to be a long fight because vested interest from the three statist parties wish the merry go round to continue. Labour only just lost the election under a corrupt voting system, Con Demery is not going to last, and unless things change dramatically the Social Democrats are going to leave the crumpled warm bed of David Cameron into the soiled sheets of Labour, breaking promises as they go.

I am a Constitutionalist, I believe that none of us count because we have no recognition in Law as individuals because we have no Constitution. We are the neo serfs. The exchequer is broke, we are to be taxed out of recession, yet we are still fighting foreign wars and we are going to give Ireland £7Bn to save the eurozone ? Did anybody consult you ? Do you approve. Shut up- just give us the money.

How do they get away with this ? because the State has the monopoly of violence, we are all frightened of the State. Whereas the State should be frightened of us the voter.

De Menezes was a stain on our country, as was Iraq and Afghanistan. We have a Ministry of Defence not a Ministry of War ! Our troops are badly equipped, badly paid and neglected in old age and injury. The only legitimate function of the State is Defence of a free country. Politicians love being associated with the Military, it makes them look hard, the trouble is our civilian police force are playing more to the Force and less to the Civilian part of the equation. When did Dixon turn into Judge Dredd on our streets.

Libertarianism needs re-branding in the UK, the Stalinist left call us right wing, we are neither of the left or the right. David Nolan who tragically died last week put us on a different axis that of Liberty to Authoritarianism. We despise the big State who ever is running it in favour of minimal government that is local and accountable.

We have the obscenity of so called Anarchists taking part in violent demonstrations in favour of large state hand outs. These are not Anarchists, they are simple leftist thugs demanding by violence what they cannot achieve by the ballot box.

Yesterday Cameron issued his first D notice, these are issued in time of war. He is no longer an authoritarian virgin. The Libertarian Party must oppose both nationally and locally. We are small very small but perhaps history will show that we kept fanning the flames of classical Liberalism in a seventy year long downpour of bureaucratic socialism.

Libertarian Council Candidate Welcomes Freeze on Council Tax

2010-11-22T11:25:00.004Z

PRESS RELEASE 22 November 2010:

Alex Ellis-Roswell, who will become one of the UK’s youngest city council candidates in next year’s local elections representing The Libertarian Party, has welcomed Canterbury City Council’s proposal to freeze council tax in the 2011/12 budget.

“The proposal to freeze council tax in Canterbury will be welcomed by thousands of already struggling households in the area. However a freeze is not enough in the long run. What the council need to be working towards is a reduction in council tax for all local residents. With a lower council tax more money will be in the pockets of local mums, dads, business owners and ordinary hard working people. It is a no brainer that with more money in their pocket, rather than the council coffers, more money will in turn be spent in local businesses in turn kick starting the local private economy again.

Canterbury relies heavily on public sector workers and thanks to our current Conservative – Liberal Democrat Government many locally will face uncertainty and unemployment in the near future. However rather than clinging onto the idea that we can afford an ever expanding public payroll, we should be looking at ways of encouraging growth in the local private sector. A reduction in council tax is just one way of doing that, encouraging local people to spend their money at local businesses.”

However, Alex Ellis-Roswell is concerned at some of the other council’s proposals for the budget 2011/12 including the worst case scenario of closing a further five public toilets, removing some litter and dog bins and doubling allotment charges.

“I am worried that the proposal to remove litter and dog bins will hit the rural areas the hardest, of which the ward I plan to represent comes under rural. The council has a lack of imagination and creativity when it comes to these cuts. There are ways to save bins and public toilets while still bringing down the cost of these services. We just have to look outside the box! Sponsorship is one option for funding some local services which has been proven to work in other districts and countries.”

Beer Economics

2010-10-29T19:16:00.007+01:00

I just received an email with the following explanation, comparing beer to tax. It stated that it was originally written by a Prof. David R. Kamerschen of Georgia University. However after doing a quick bit of googling it turns out Kamerschen denies all knowledge of it.

But anyway, I enjoyed it's simplistic analogy of high end tax payers and how tax cuts effect them.

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100.If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this..

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.

So, that ' s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are such good customers," he said, "I shall reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody ' s share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man ' s bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).

Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"

"Yeah, that ' s right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It ' s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That ' s true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn ' t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next week the tenth man did not show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - there was not enough money between them to pay for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works.

The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

If anyone does know the true author of this, I would love to know!

Can I please change generations?

2010-10-20T21:00:00.003+01:00

What an embarassment my generation actually is. I've said before about how I was ashamed to be a part of this generation, due to the mini-riot over a Primark Sale, but now I feel it is time to completely divorce myself from this self centred, self deserving, materialistic bunch of pathetic, "apathetic socialists".

The reaction from my age group to the Spending Review has been really quite telling. There are millions dieing worldwide due to hunger and warfare, helped in many ways by our interventionalist Government. There are hundreds of thousands of families facing a future of unemployment, within the private sector aswell as the public, helped in many ways by our small business hating Government. There are just over 60 million people in this country watched and spied upon, thanks entirely by our liberty hating Government.

Where were you when all of these people were in trouble? Were you marching on the streets? Were you fighting for civil liberties? Were you protesting against the war? Were you campaigning for a fairer tax system and more freedom?

No.

Ofcourse you wern't.

You were sitting indoors, in your warm double glazed house in suburbia. You didn't give one when it mattered. So why are you suddenly protesting? Campaigning? Fighting?

That's right...

You have been spurred into action because all of a sudden there is a chance you will have to pay a bit more to go to Uni. All of a sudden there is a chance you won't receive your nice £30 in the bank every week for the privaledge of going to college for a few days a week.

Welcome to the real world. The world doesn't owe you anything. You're meant to prove yourself before you can start bleeting on like a crazed lamb.

A crazed, bleeting lamb is all you are. Nothing more.
The above image is to demonstrate what a lamb should look like- non crazed and not bleeting.

The Importance of Guns and Shooting

2010-06-17T12:40:00.003+01:00

What has happened in West Cumbria over the last few days is tragic and devastating for those living in the area. My thoughts go out to all those who were affected. It is a sad and quite embarrassing truth that one of the many things going around my head, when the news broke about a mass shooting in Cumbria, was “How will the Government use this as a sick excuse to tighten gun control laws”.

It was inevitable. “BAN GUNS” “GUNS ARE EVIL” “GUNS KILL PEOPLE” the cry of hysteria and band wagon jumping started in fifth gear shortly after the tragic events. I will now attempt to make the case for the importance of guns in the UK. Hear me out.

As someone who worked on a Game Shoot in the rolling hills of the Kent Downs for nearly 2 years and who was pretty integrated into country life throughout those years, I have plenty of first hand experience of guns and their effects. Guns do not kill people. The people using the guns kill people.

The overwhelming majority of gun owners in the UK, of which there are many hundreds of thousands, are responsible and sane human beings. They own guns for many reasons such as clay pigeon shooting, game shooting, vermin control and competition shooting. Gun ownership is a hobby, a job, a sport, a passion and a way of life for so many people. I am quite frankly sick and tired of hearing people say that guns are a weapon used for killing. Guns are no more a weapon than cars or knives are. If you were to actually look at the UK figures, cars kill more people than guns do per year.

What led Mr Bird to use his guns as lethal weapons of mass murder on Wednesday morning, I don’t think anyone will ever fully understand. What we can surely all fully understand though, is that this sudden flip in mental stability was something that nobody could have prevented. No amount of Whitehall papers, laws or regulations dreamt up by even the most intelligent and creative of political minds could ever have prevented the deaths of those 12 innocent victims. This was an unpreventable, regrettable and devastating tragedy. But we in the UK don’t like to admit something is out of our control. So we go full steam ahead into taking control of something quite uncontrollable.

Prof. Peter Squires of Criminology at the University of Brighton tops my list of hysteria fuelled anti-gun law tosh. He proposed on the BBC, and again on his Guardian Column, that gun ownership is OK. That it is quite alright for someone to possess a gun within their own home. However if one were to own such an object, that ammunition and cartridges would not be allowed in the same premises. Where he proposes the ammunition and cartridges to be kept, I don’t know. Whether he expects everyone to roll on down to their local Police Station every time to collect their daily allowance of ammunition?

So who even cares? The majority of people don’t own guns, they have no need to own a gun and quite frankly why does a proportion of the population even still own guns in this modern 21^st Century United Kingdom? Let me take you back to the fact that I worked on a game shoot for 2 years. That shoot was vital to the local economy. Where I live in a little village in between Canterbury and Dover sitting comfortably next to a roaring A road we have nothing. OK, I lie. We have a Londis, a Post Office (remarkably), 3 pubs and a hair dressers. If you were to add all the populations of the surrounding villages together, you would come to a figure of around 1500. It doesn’t take a genius to work out that a couple of local amenities are not enough to provide enough jobs and an incoming revenue to the local community. But that’s where the game shoot just outside of the village comes into effect.

That shoot brings in an essential income to the local villages. It literally takes the money directly from the pockets of the richest people in the City of London, who pay mega money for the privilege of shooting a few birds every week, straight into the pockets of local land workers and businesses. It acts as a slide for money to come out of London and into rural communities. I’m fortunate with where I live. I live in a very nice part of the English countryside, thanks party due to its proximity with Canterbury and main land Europe. But some rural communities across the UK are way below the poverty line. They rely so heavily on shooters from the big smokey city to come into their humble back garden and pay money to shoot lead into the sky.

So next time you question the need or importance of gun ownership in the UK, just think of all those quiet rural backwaters that rely so heavily on its existence. Please think before shouting bizarre hysteria fuelled garbage about guns.

Thank you.

Written for PoliticalPundits.co.uk

A Tragic Waste of Life

2010-05-27T22:15:00.003+01:00

The news today has highlighted a problem we have in the UK that is so very rarely discussed in the open. A man has been arrested on suspicion of murdering and disembowelling 3 female sex workers. The youngest, just 31, has been described as a much loved daughter and sister. I ask you this: How many more young women have to die on our streets before the legalisation of consensual adult prostitution is properly discussed and debated?

It is an absolutely appalling truth that in the 21st Century, we in the UK force thousands of young, vulnerable and desperate women onto some of the most unsafe streets in the country. The women shouldn’t have to walk the streets, risking their lives and health. The women should be in a safe and secured, indoor facility. They shouldn’t have to ever think “I wonder if this will be the man that rapes and kills me”.

If prostitution between consensual adults were legalised the effects would be overwhelmingly positive and almost immediate. You would no longer see young women walking the streets in the dead of night, which would in turn, put an end to potentially dangerous men curb crawling through residential and commercial areas. You don’t have to be an estate agent to make the connection between street prostitution and local house prices.

These young women, who were once forced to walk the streets in order to find trade, would now have the legality to set up establishments. This will have a hugely positive effect. It will increase security for the workers, and indeed customers, tremendously. It will mean proper sexual health checks can be undertaken, which will not only benefit the workers, but also the customers.

The effect of legalising this trade will also have huge economic benefits as well as security and health benefits. Currently many of these women just aren’t in the system. Simply put, they’re not paying tax. But there is a deeper reason to why currently many prostitutes don’t pay tax in this country. It’s not actually because of its legal status. The main reason is many of the sex workers in this country are here illegally. Many were brought here illegally on the human trafficking route from Eastern Europe and Asia. The only way you are ever going to stop, or curb, this vile and inhumane trade is to simply catch them off guard.

Legal prostitution would have the same employment rules as any other UK business. By doing this, you would go a long way to cutting down the sex slavery that is going on across this country. I am not saying the legalisation of prostitution would be the final solution. It would not solve all the problems currently connected with the trade. There are also of course many different degrees and levels of legalisation that would all have different outcomes and effects. But this is surely the right direction to be going down. Currently we are abandoning thousands of young, vulnerable women in this country. We are simply giving them away to criminally minded and violent human beings. My thoughts go out to the families of the murdered sex workers. My thoughts equally go out to the thousands of sex workers who will be walking the streets tonight, powerless and so desperately vulnerable. I don’t know about you, but I personally don’t want to ever see another murdered prostitute on the news ever again.

Written for PoliticalPundits.co.uk

Please Don't Tell Me What I Can and Can't Wear

2010-05-26T18:43:00.005+01:00

The Burka. It’s back. The French are the latest European nation to come out in support of a bill that will ban “face-covering” clothing in public. This is all to do with the Burka and the fantasy myth of “Islamisation of Europe” and ofcourse because everyone who wears a Burka is hiding a bomb.

It is an issue I feel passionately about, and was the reason I eventually left UKIP at the start of this year, after they decided to throw away all their remaining “Small Government, Libertarian” credentials in favour of a Ban the Burka Policy. I hope this issue of banning a piece of clothing gets fully debated by all UK Political Parties, and equally, I hope that the intolerance and populist authoritarianism stays on the other side of the Channel. A ban on clothing has no place in our free and tolerant nation.

One quote I come back to alot, which I think speaks for many “Burka-bannists” is a quote from Lord Pearson, Leader of UKIP:

Lord Pearson: “We are not Muslim bashing, but this is incompatible with Britain’s values of freedom and democracy.”

The absolute hypocricy shines out in this quote.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one simple belief:

If it doesn’t harm you or effect you- Don’t worry about it.

Live and Let Live. That is my motto, and is one of the very first things I ever remember being taught by my Mother. If someone wants to wear a Burka down the street or in a shop, I dont mind. If someone wants to wear a full suit of Medieval Armour down the street or in a shop, I dont mind. If someone wants to wear a fig leaf to cover their modesty down the street or in a shop, again, I really don’t mind.

WHAT ABOUT SECURITY!? I hear you cry. That’s fine. If you walk into a bank, into a shop or through Border Control the people in charge of those places should have the power to politely ask you to uncover your face. It doesn’t need someone in London to waste precious time debating over the moral, ethical and security issues of a nationwide ban.

No, the Burka is not a religious necessity. Nor is the necklace Crucifix that many Christians in this country choose to wear. But it is a fundamental freedom of choice and expression. Something we should all protect and celebrate.

Written for PoliticalPundits.co.uk

Michael Moore: A Hypocritical Story

2010-05-23T14:43:00.004+01:00

Capitalism: A Love Story

Watching Michael Moore “investigate” Capitalism was like watching a confused drunk octopus attempt the leading role of Swan Lake.

An absolute vile smell of hypocrisy loomed over the whole film and after watching it, a vile taste of hypocrisy took its place. I watched the film on Channel 4 and the hypocrisy started before the opening credits had even begun. Sponsored by Honda was the message. Honda being a huge global corporation employing over 180,000 people and creating yearly revenue in excess of 120 Billion US$.

It didn’t stop there though. It doesn’t take a genius to see how many huge companies and corporations were and are involved with this film- a film that warns so much of big business. The Weinstein Company, Dog Eat Dog Films, Overture Films and Paramount Vantage. All four very rich, very successful companies helped Mr Moore in his little war against rich people and reality. But good old Moore wouldn’t make any money from this would he? Well the film has made gross revenue of $16,412,936 and I'm sure he has had a slice of that pie.

Welcome to Capitalism Mr Moore. You create something someone else wants and you get a reward for it. It works. In fact I would have had kinder words for the film if it had been properly and independently produced and distributed, as is possible these days, and the profit made from the film be put towards charity of some kind.

Let’s step back a moment to the confused drunk octopus performing ballet analogy. The confusion and messiness of this film isn’t just found in the funding and production. It’s also found in Mr Moore’s head and subsequently what comes out of his mouth. On one hand he gives the impression that profiting is just plain ethically wrong. He blames the Free Market for pretty much every bad thing in the last 100 years and yet here he is, standing in a bread factory. This isn’t any old bread factory though. This factory is a co-operative. A factory where even the assembly line staff apparently earn up to $60,000 a year, born into a Free (-ish) Market nation. Because the workers of this factory got off of their arses, stopped asking and started to do, they have achieved something fantastic. They have achieved a fair work place and they have done it off their own backs. This is the ideal of a Libertarian Society in my opinion and something that should get a lot more praise and coverage.

But he couldn’t stop long at that successful but fair factory because he had to show us some more emotive, heart string pulling footage. We were treated to such delights like watching poor black residents of New Orleans trapped on their rooftops after Hurricane Katrina, watching a poor couple being evicted from their family farm and watching the poor workers of a factory that had just been closed due to debt. Notice the common denominator there? Poor. This film was more about class divisions and class warfare than any real factual truth on why big businesses are getting bigger. He completely missed the point. Big Government = Big Business. He came so close to making the connection a couple of times during the 120 minutes, but it never clicked in place properly.

Then he rolled out the mother of all hypocrisy. The bloke who you’re not meant to disagree with because otherwise you’re just a gun touting, bible bashing racist. Of course Obama had to make an appearance. And the most nail biting (with frustration) part was he was depicted as some sort of hero against big business. I cannot exaggerate this point enough; you must see the film to fully understand how over the top it went to celebrate the new President as some sort of freedom fighter. Let me spell this out to you now Mr Moore, OBAMA = CORPORATIONS. He loves them, they love him. Obama and Big Business are pretty much married in the suburbs with kids and a dog.

This whole ignorance of the simple equation of Big Government = Big Business, totally undermined the message the film was trying to get out there. One particular example of this was the section on PA Child Care, the privately funded Juvenile Prison. We saw how a number of teenagers had been convicted for petty crimes by a State Judge and sent in with overzealous convictions. Of course this was all making the private company a lot of money and in return the State Judge a lot of money in back handers. This was the State getting involved with the Free Market, Corporatism. This is not an example of why not to fund prisons privately, but more of an example of why Business + State = Bad Bad Bad.

Then we heard of how awful the banks were for lobbying the US Government for their bailout when things got a bit sticky on Wall Street. And who passed the bailout? Oh yes, that’s right- The US Government did. They are the ones who have been behind the bike sheds all this time trying to chum up with big business. But this again didn’t really feature heavily on Mr Moore’s mind. He was more concerned about class divisions, rich people being rich and how he could best make himself look like an uneducated fool.

Which must be why he brought out the God Squad during this film. Not contempt with his uneducated foolish image so far, he brought out the big boys. We heard from a couple of Reverends, Vicars and Fathers or whatever fancy name they give themselves, to tell us just how evil Capitalism is. We are talking about some serious evil according to the bible bashers on this film. It may not be in the 10 Commandments (as far as I’m aware), but apparently making money and being involved with a Capitalist Society makes you akin to Hitler, Stalin, the Witch from The Wizard of OZ and even the Devil himself! Burn in hell anyone who wants to make their lives better! Jesus will be very sad. But hold on, who is it that made the equivalent of £billions, hundreds of years ago from poor, uneducated and desperate people across Europe? Could it have been religion and possibly the Christian Church….

Michael Moore lives in a fantasy land full of leprechauns, elves, rolling hills and woodlands. The official currency is “smiles” and everyone skips around holding hands singing Beatles songs while picking colourful mushrooms. I want to visit Mr Moore’s world, and maybe even stay there if it’s that good. Unfortunately though I live in the real world and I’m busy next weekend. I wish Mr Moore and all his happy followers the best of luck in the future.

Fck Wnk T*t Libertarians

2010-05-21T10:49:00.004+01:00

Why do so many Libertarian bloggers, writers and supporters feel such a strong need to string every other sentence together with a TIT FACE WILLY BLOODY swear word?

Is it because they're just angry old men?
Are they trying to prove a point against censorship?
Do they not have a wide enough vocabulary?

I am all in favour of free speech, and it personally doesn't bother me what words people choose to use in their day to day language and writings. However, if a person struggles to write or talk about even the most placid of subjects without dropping a few old viking words and insults into it, I worry slightly. I worry because, well... there is just no need for it. It doesn't acheive anything. The most irritating part of all this, is that 99% of the time, the great content is just marred by the surrounding language. It acts as a distraction and can drive away many potential readers and listeners.

And I'm not just talking about the grassroots of Libertarianism in the UK. I'm talking also about the leadership. I am talking about people who actually want to represent the general public, using such language that I wouldn't even repeat to my Mum (-and my Mum is far from a prude).

Everyone has either heard, seen or read about Chris Mounsey's (Libertarian Party Leader) appearence on The Daily Politics Show, some weeks back now. And one thing that surprised me was how all those normally individualistic Libertarian bloggers, writers and supporters all of a sudden started to group around in some sort of little support group for him. They all of a sudden made an absolute verbal war on Andrew Neil, the presenter of the show Chris got eaten alive on.

"It was so unfair"
"Typical BBC bias against small parties"
"Chris didn't get a chance to answer any questions"
"Andrew is such a socialist, facist, communist, anti-christ, left wing, authoritarian horrible person"

And their whining went on, and on, and on, and on...

Get Real.

Chris Mounsey is a highly intelligent man. He is also the Leader of a UK Political Party. He must have known that some of the more "risky stuff" he was writing on his blog would one day come and bite him. The language he used on his old blog, was just not leadership style writing. And I'm not saying this because I didn't enjoy his anger and passion fuelled rants. I did. But how do you expect the media to act? They are ofcourse going to smother themselves all over it at the first chance. I believe Chris was treated fairly and no differently to any other politician.

And as for everyone's attempts at "brown nosing" Chris, pathetic. Grow some balls of your own and think for yourself. It might not make you many friends in politics and it might even make you a few silent enemies, but at least you will be able to hold your head up high with a bit of self respect.

In conclusion then, it doesn't personally bother me what language anyone chooses to use or associate themselves with. However, if you are planning on getting elected as anything or having any contact with the media, think. It's not cencorship, it's common sense. Because if you can't completely back up your reasoning for writing or saying something when asked about it at a later date... Then you probably shouldn't have said it in the first place.

I support Free Speech, but not your Free Speech

2010-05-12T20:37:00.005+01:00

David Cameron's thoughts. He has complained about the protests on Westminster's Parliament Square, in an interview last year, saying they had turned it into a "pretty poor place".
A pretty poor place?
A PRETTY POOR PLACE?
Are you kidding? What on earth is "poor" about freedom of speech and expression Mr C? Surely the fact that anyone is free to set up a demonstration and protest, directly outside the law making offices of this land, is something to be cherished, celebrated and protected?

I went up to see the latest addition to Parliament Square on Monday. Democracy Village. The people I met and interviewed there were quite inspirational. They showed community spirit and pure passion. Passion is something that we are lacking in this country right now, but passion is what you will currently find on Parliament Square. Democracy Village, who are campaigning against the war in Afghanistan, and the other demonstrations that are held there add a fascinating layer to our UK politics. They make Parliament Square a "pretty rich place" in my opinion.

For anyone who is interested in reading the full article I've written and photos taken about Democracy Village, I will be publishing it all on BUZZ Magazine's Blog in the coming week. It will also all feature in the paper/ "real" version of BUZZ in the near future. For anyone in the dark about BUZZ, it's my latest brain child of a local, "alternative media" culture magazine based in Canterbury. If you are interested in contributing, advertising, or you're just nosey, email me:
editor@thebuzzmag.co.uk

I think for anyone who respects and believes in freedom of speech and expression, all we can hope for is for Nick Clegg to grow some balls and keep Dave under control when it comes to Parliament Square. We can hope.

Just on an additional note, I promise I will try not to write about Dave in my next Blog Post. I am very concious of the fact that my last 3 Posts have featured Dave in one form or another.

Buzz Magazine
Blog: www.thebuzzmag.blogspot.com
Email: editor@thebuzzmag.co.uk
Democracy Village
Facebook: www.tiny.cc/demovil
Email: democracyvillage@gmail.com

'Cos it's cool to hate Dave "init"

2010-05-11T22:07:00.004+01:00

So it's official. Dave has been Prime Minister for merely a few hours and already people are jumping on the bandwagon. Cos it's cool to hate Dave, right?

The following are just a small selection of some of the facebook groups that appeared on my news feed:

£30 a week for me , LOL jk david cameron is prime minister
David Cameron is not my Prime Minister.
I could've done a better job than Gordon Brown. Lol jk, i'm David Cameron.
I bet I can find a million people who DON'T want David Cameron as our PM.
throwing eggs at David Cameron, brick shaped eggs - made from brick.
Im a great prime minister... LOL jk Im david Cameron -.-.
"I'm David Cameron, and ruining Britain was my idea."
Hooray ! David Cameron is Prime Minister, LOL Jk, He's a twat !
The Awkward Silence When David Cameron Becomes PM.

Some made me laugh. Some made no sense to me.

The most worrying thing to me, were the types of people who appeared to be joining these groups. They were mainly non-political teenagers. "Ageist Bigot" I hear you say. Yeh I know right, I just hate to encourage young people into politics... (Sarcasm)

So what am I complaining about? Surely it is a good thing that young people are starting to take an active interest in politics. Kindof. It was the fact that for alot of these people, this election has been the first election that they have taken an interest in, thanks to the TV Debates and the use of Social Media in the campaigning. So what is their experience of politics so far? Hate. It's all about hate. Do you people understand how powerful that word is? It is not a word to be used lightly, along with it's counterpart, "Love". And yet my facebook newsfeed has been clogged up by people litterally throwing the hate word around like it's some sort of joke.

Anyone who knows me, knows that I am not a fan of David Cameron. However, David is a human. He is a father. He is a husband. He is a son. He is a human! (Likewise with Gordon Brown). Politics is not about hate. It's not about hating a politician because of his looks or even his political beliefs. There is no space for hate in politics.

I do believe politicians, from whatever colour they may come from, are good people. I believe they all got involved with politics for the right reasons. I believe they all want to see a better society. I believe all politicians share these things in common. What they don't share in common is their vision of a better society, or how to achieve that better society. It could also be easily argued that many politicians have lost their principles and their core beliefs, all thanks to power and money. But I repeat...

"There is no space for hate in politics".

Debate, protest, be opinionated! But don't hate because of a differing belief.
If you want to talk politics, talk politics. But do it in a constructive way, without getting personal and childish about it!

Mr Prime Minister?

2010-05-06T14:49:00.005+01:00

OK, here goes my Prediction for Tonight:

Results of May 2010 General Election

Conservative Victory, with a majority of under 10 seats.

The Vote Share:

40% Conservatives
29% Labour
21% Liberal Democrats
10% Other

I think The Conservatives will do much better than all the Polls have been saying over the last few weeks. I believe people who may have been thinking of voting for Liberal Democrats and smaller parties will make an impulse decision to vote Conservative.

I also think Labour will do much better than everyone is saying. Labour voters are quiet but faithful.

As for the Liberal Democrats... hype. I hate to say it but I really don't think the majority of people who have said they will vote for them will even bother voting at all today. They will almost certainly gain at least 10 new seats though.

What for the smaller parties then? They will do OK. I can't imagine any UKIP, Green or BNP MP's this time around though. The only exception is possibly Nigel Farage, UKIP. And no, I don't honestly think Caroline Lucas, Green Party, will win at Brighton.

Even if The Conservatives don't win a majority, I still believe Cameron will become the next Prime Minister. Like it or not. And no, the results above are NOT wishful thinking on my half, just realistic observations.

We shall see tonight- and Good Luck to Martin Cullip and Nic Coome for The Libertarian Party!

I also think, anyone who hasn't already should probably go and become a "supporter" of my Facebook Page :) Click HERE

I have found the cure to insomnia!

2010-04-28T18:10:00.004+01:00

If you suffer from insomnia, or any other sleep deprevation illness, I have indeed found the cure! Make yourself comfortable, dim down the lights and read The Libertarian Party's 2010 Manifesto. I promise you, by the time you reach page 2 you will be in a deep sleep.

You can read the manifesto HERE.

Now don't get me wrong, the message the manifesto is trying to get out there is OK. The problem comes with the design/ lack of design and the content. You need to be a political scientist to actually understand everything within it's 37 pages. Alternatively you could probably scrape through it if you're a political geek. This really isn't the sort of publication that will win hearts and minds.

And it isn't just the political language and tone of content that makes this publication so unbearable. Where is the contents? You know, that page at the start of any half decent document that tells you where everything is? Don't even bother trying to find a specific section of the manifesto. You will be there for days skim reading the bland, colourless 37 pages of intricate political and ideological explanations on each and every policy. In fact by the time you have found the specific policy that interests you, it will be 7th May and Nick Clegg will already be moving into 10 Downing Street. Game Over.

So what of these pelican inspired black and white pages? Well it's just that. Whoever made this document, I am assuming, made it on MS Word and probably did it in the commercial breaks while watching Coronation Street. There isn't even one cheeky little clipart picture to lighten the mood up.

Now I am not saying The Libertarian Party should have produced a document to rival the grandness of the Bible, Harry Potter or any other children's fictional books. But c'mon?! How much talent do we have in the party? For a party of 400 members, an awful lot of talent! And it's not just talent, it is willing talent. There are members of the party crying out for involvement and a sense of belonging. LET THEM PROVE THEMSELVES. Email them. Call them. Tell them what needs to be done and see if they can help in anyway.

"But we only have 2 candidates in this election anyway"

True. And 2 very decent candidates in my opinion. Surely we owe it to these 2 candidates to produce for them a half decent Manifesto from which they can win support and votes. Would you like more candidates next election? I am assuming the answer is yes, and if so, how do you plan on attracting credible, experienced and smart people to join and put themselves up for candidacy in the next election? Impress them. Show them how professional we can be. Showcase to them our policies and ideas. The 2010 Manifesto could have been a fantastic opportunity to show off and impress. This has been an opportunity wasted.

Hitler's milky moustache

2010-04-27T00:02:00.009+01:00

Above is Hitler, presiding over his two milky moustached, blonde haired, "perfect" race dream subjects. It seems the EU has given up pretending that they aren't fullfilling Hitler's life ambition to unitize the European peninsula under one centrally controlled government.

I present to you the "Make Mine Milk" campaign:

www.makeminemilk.co.uk

Fantastic I thought when I first saw it. A campaign to get people to drink more milk! A campaign that will help our long suffering dairy farmers here in the UK! But then I saw the flag. The flag that represents illiberalism, undemocratic processes and supranationalism. I am ofcourse talking about the European Union flag.

This campaign has been pumped with over £2.5million of the EU's budget... our money. When on earth did it become any government's duty, let alone the EU's duty, to fund campaigns of this nature?! I ofcourse fully support the campaign to get more people drinking the white stuff. But why did the EU have to get involved? Why did they have to spend our money, without our permission, on a campaign to influence people's habits, lifestyle and diet?

And a question for any vegans out there, and I know for a fact that I do have vegan readers, how do you feel? How do you feel that your principles, beliefs and lifestyle choices are being positively campaigned AGAINST with YOUR money? So what about all the non-vegan readers... this surely doesn't really affect you does it? Well it will when the EU decides to spend your money against your principles, beliefs and lifestyles choices in a similar campaign.

This "Make Mine Milk" campaign would have been much fairer if it were funded fully by The Milk Marketing Forum and Dairy UK. I also see no reason why charities with a vested interest in nutrition, diet and healthy living couldn't have been a part of this campaign. Rather than being creative and ambitous by securing funding and support from relavent charities, organisations, businesses and individuals, they have instead fallen back on the same old "Government will do it for me".

Well here is the joke guys.... that £2.5million you think you have managed to get off the EU has come straight out of our pockets.
What does that mean?
It means we pay higher taxes..
What does that mean?
It means we will have less money to buy your milk!

So let us all raise a glass of milk to the EU, Hitler's wonderful brainchild of the 20th Century!
(That was pure sarcasm. I would rather not be involved with raising a glass to anything related to Hitler. But lets all drink milk, or soya milk, anyway.)

Who is this George anyway?

2010-04-23T12:57:00.005+01:00

Who is he anyway?
George?
George of the jungle?
Oh! He's a "Saint"?
Why do you keep talking about him?
Oh! He killed a dragon did he?
Sounds like a crackhead to me?
So why can't you celebrate about a crackhead dragon slayer?
Oh! You read The Daily Mail?
'Nuff said.

Happy St. Georges Day Folks!

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested in reading:
My Top 5 Libertarian Songs

A Libertarian(-ish) 2010 General Election Manifesto

2010-04-19T17:29:00.003+01:00

OK, this was just because I was super bored and had a new bit of software I wanted to test out. So I thought I might aswell share with you.
The "manifesto" is just a simple collection of my views.
Enjoy.

Read it HERE.

Presenting you with: Mao Ze Brown!

2010-04-13T15:42:00.012+01:00

First of all, another apology for the lack of Blog updates recently. I am in the middle of setting up my own business and thanks to our wonderful Government, which tells us so often they are here to help small businesses, I have been pretty pre-occupied.

Above is The Labour Party's new 2010 Election Poster and Manifesto cover. I have one thing to say to them.
WHAT. THE. HELL. WERE. YOU. THINKING.

This is either some sort of sick political joke that I don't personally find funny or they really are showing their support for Communism and good old Mao of China.

Yeh, those sun rays definitely look familiar...
Let us not forget the seriousness of all this. Mao Ze Dong, the once communist ruler of China was responsible for the killing of 77MILLION people.

77 MILLION PEOPLE DIED.

And you want to replicate his posters? You sick, insensitive fools. Oh hold on.. whats this I see...

Ah, its a "perfect" little Viatnamese Communist family. The same Viatnam that killed thousands of innocent people? The same "perfect" little British Labour family?

So the latest poster from The Labour Party might be slightly better designed with enhanced, richer colours. But, as they keep reminding us, scratch the surface. Or in this case, just google image search "communist poster". Do your own comparisons.

Thank you and I will leave you with another delightful poster designed by the Government...

(the above poster is NOT a spoof, it is NOT from a communist or fascist state and it is infact in use right now all across London)

The Rainbow Vote

2010-04-05T19:18:00.006+01:00

Many would argue The Rainbow/ Pink/ Gay Vote is something only of importance to newspapers pushing for stories. These people are incredibly incorrect. Anyone who is willing to ignore an estimated 6% of the population, or in other words 3.6 million citizens, is just plain silly. The political parties understand how important the rainbow vote is in this election and as a result we have seen a constant battle, everyone trying to win the hearts and minds of some of the most forward thinking people in Britain.

So who are these 3.6 million people voting for? In a recent poll conducted by the social networking site "Gaydar" it gives The Conservatives a 1.4% lead at 28.9%. Interestinly though The Liberal Democrats, currently in 3rd place 0.5% under Labour have seen the biggest rise since the 2005 General Election. The Lib Dems have seen a 7.2% increase since the last election in the gay community.

Full Results from Gaydar Survey:

Who did you vote for in the 2005 General Election?

Labour: 39.9%
Conservative: 22.1%
Liberal Democrat: 19.8%
Did not vote: 6%
Other: 4.1%
Green: 3.7%
Scottish National party: 3.5%
Plaid Cymru: 0.9%

Who do you intend to vote for in the 2010 General Election?

Conservative: 28.9%
Labour: 27.5%
Liberal Democrat: 27%
Green: 4.5%
Other: 4.3%
Don't know: 3.7%
Scottish National party: 3.4%
Plaid Cymru: 0.7%

So what have The Liberal Democrats done to create this huge rise in support? I think the gay community has genuinely had enough of Labour and Conservative. Labour have done a dam good job in the last 13 years supporting gay equality, and The Conservatives assure us of their modern outlook. But The Lib Dems seem to have that bit extra. They seem to be actively involved with getting the message out on how inequality is still alive. They have pledged to reverse the ban on gay men donating blood (something I feel personally very strongly about), pledged to allow full equal martial rights for same sex "civil partnerships" and have also spoken out about the horrific laws currently being written up in Uganda, which will make homosexual acts a criminal offence punishable by death. When The Liberal Democrats speak out about gay equality, they sound as though they want to, rather than sounding like they feel they have to. Big difference.

So what about The Conservatives? David Cameron is very keen to tell everyone how his party has changed and is all for supporting the gay community. What does this mean in practice? Well, I would love to be able to write a list here of Conservative pledges on gay equality, however I cannot find any. I have looked. If anyone from The Conservative Party would like to direct me to the right place to find their party's pledges, I will ofcourse add them here. I can't see a Conservative government abolishing or persecting the gay community, don't get me wrong. However, I cannot see any evidence that a Conservative government would push for more equality.

What we must not forget though is the gay community doesn't, and shouldn't, purely vote on gay pledges. Gay people do have deep political beliefs outside of their sexuality too!

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested in reading:
Liberty in The Commonwealth

Share

Has UKIP Done The Right Thing At Last?

2010-04-02T21:13:00.005+01:00

So Hugh Muir from The Gaurdian has managed to get a UKIP PPC suspended from any party position. The (ex-)PPC in question is Paul Kevin Wiffen, who among other things is a film maker and the London Branch chairman. He also appears to be a bit on the wild side when it comes to his views on the left wing, Romanian Gypsies, Muslims and Africans. The reason UKIP has suspended him is due to a comment Kevin made on Community Care website which can be found in full here.

Paul Wiffen's comment: "Britain is full, you prat! Even your scummy, illiterate Grauniad admits it!

In the circumstances, I think "get lost" is positively polite. "Go forth and multiply" elsewhere would be my wording.

You left-wing scum are all the same, wanting to hand our birthright to Romanian gypsies who beat their wives and children into begging and stealing money they can gamble with, Muslim nutters who want to kill us and put us all under mediaeval Sharia law, the same Africans who sold their Afro-Caribbean brothers into a slavery that Britain was the first to abolish (but you still want to apologize for!)

Worry about where we are going to live and grow food, you wanker, not the UKIP policy that might just save your worthless skin!"

It is an appaling tirade of hate for sure, yes. And I do believe UKIP was right to come down on Wiffen in the way they did. However, I somehow feel that Wiffen is being used as a bit of a scapegoat. He certainly isn't the only UKIP PPC to hold such vile views and not the only one to have made them public and been found out by the media. But he is the only one to have been reported on in national media and is by far the most well known PPC to have been reported on.

For example, only this week Martin Davies and Ian Proud were both reported on in The Chronicle (Local Newcastle Newspaper) for joining Facebook groups such as "Chop Terrorist's Big Toes Off So They Can't Wear Their Flip Flops" and "Single Mummery Is Bad For Society". Niether Davies or Proud, both PPC's, have had any sort of disciplinary action taken against them by UKIP to my knowledge.

I cannot stand by and say I agree with Wiffen's comments that he made. However, I do feel sympathy for the man. As far as I can see he is a much better candidate with a wealth of experience and knowledge, far more than some of the other UKIP PPC's who have also been negatively reported on. Why is it that he has been singled out?

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested in reading:
The BNP are just UKIP in jeans

Share

This Is Why Young People Don't Vote!

2010-04-01T14:30:00.004+01:00

Above is a Youtube Video made for Tunbridge Wells Borough Council to encourage young people to vote and get involved with politics. Please take it from a young person... No. This will NOT encourage any young person with even a single brain cell to vote and will certainly not encourage many to get actively involved with politics. It tells you nothing over the irritating, cringe worthy "noise", that I am guessing is ment to be music(?).

The whole thing is an absolute joke. After watching it, I genuinely feel patronised. Do you think patronising young people is the way to get them to vote? COME ON PEOPLE! THINK!

So how do you get young people to take an interest in politics and voting? Well first you do not make tax payer funded, patronising, irritating, uninformative videos like the above mentioned. After you have mastered the art of not wasting tax payer's money, the question becomes more tricky. There is no easy, step by step, fool proof way of getting anyone, let alone young people, to vote. However, as always, I have a few off the wall ideas.

You cannot expect an 18 year old who has never heard a thing about the political parties to all of a sudden be told to vote and actually do it. Things have to start years before their 18th Birthday. Currently in secondary school you learn about the electoral system and how it was formed. Pretty good if you are already interested in Politics or History. But what about all those people who just want to vote for the right person. They don't want to be an MP, they don't want to be Prime Minister, they don't want to be Supreme Overlord of the World, they don't want to be involved. All they want to do is get an education, a decent job, a family and every few years vote for someone they understand and can believe in. What about these people? This is the bulk of people, which is sometimes hard to remember for someone actively involved with Politics. Reality Check: "Most people don't give a dam about the ins and outs of the Political World".

So, what about these people? Things need to start young, and they need to start local. Get local Councillors and the local MP into Primary Schools to do talks on what they actually do, and get them involved with non political activites with the pupils and school aswell. In the same way the Fire and Police Service builds up relationships with schools, Politics needs to also.

So now the young person has gone through Primary School understanding the basic roles of their local Council and knowing the name of their MP. They now move on to Secondary School. Mock Elections. I will say that one more time to get my message across. Mock Elections. These are the most fantastic things to get pupils, from 12 years to 16 years old, actively involved with debate, party politics and voting. Mock Elections are held at the same time as General Elections, Council Elections and European Elections. Invite into school representatives, or the candidates themselves, to do a hustings type school assembly. Each "candidate" does a quick speech on why the pupils should vote for them and their party. After the speeches, the floor is open for pupils to ask the parties questions directly. After all that, the pupils leave and vote for whichever party or candidate they want in the same way real elections are held.

They then leave Secondary School, maybe to go straight into work or to carry on in education. Either way, they should now understand politics, voting and the importance of politics in everyone's lives.

"Practical Politics" rather than "Textbook Politics". Believe it or not, the majority of young people want to meet the faces behind the names, shake hands, and ask (alot) of questions. It is just a shame the same people politicians are trying to win votes off of, are the same people they just aren't listening to.

Share

Being a Catholic Libertarian By Gregg Beaman

2010-03-31T14:52:00.013+01:00

The following is a Guest Post by The Libertarian Party's Chairman, Gregg Beaman. I asked him to write how his belief in God and the Roman Catholic Church relates to his belief of Libertarianism and how it is possible for anyone to hold both beliefs. I myself had questions as to how someone from such a strict religous organisation can also hold beliefs on freedom and minimal Government. What he wrote in response answered many of my previous questions. Thank you Gregg for taking the time to write this.

Being a Catholic Libertarian

I don’t want to use this piece to justify my belief in God, nor would I dream of lecturing people who do not believe or are agnostic, I prefer to leave that to theologians, philosophers and others who have devoted much more time and energy than I have to studying these things. What I hope to do here is to explain how I feel that being a Catholic sits easily with being a Libertarian. The following quote is from the Most Rev Peter Smith, Archbishop of Cardiff:

“If you simply try to enforce behaviour by law, it doesn’t work terribly well in practice. Governments can’t do everything, and there’s been a tendency in recent years to think government has to do everything. The downside of that is that people think ‘well, I don't have to bother’.”

That quote goes a long way to explaining how many people, not just libertarians, feel today about politics and the state, or rather the nanny state. Sadly many opponents of libertarianism claim that we just want a ‘dog-eat-dog’ world where the strong thrive and tough on the rest. That is not true. Libertarians merely believe that the state is not the best service provider and that we should provide the highest level of service we can. In other words, we want value for money. If we can provide a higher level of service, say in health care, by removing state control I would suggest that we have a moral duty to do that.

On the question of human behaviour I feel that Catholicism, indeed Christianity generally, provides a much more valuable guide to behaviour and personal morality than the state ever could. Whether or not people accept it today our laws are derived from our Judaeo-Christian heritage and without that our whole legal and moral framework would look radically different.

My behaviour is guided by my moral beliefs primarily, not because the state dictates how I should behave. If I can get away with speeding, without endangering others, I will, regardless of what the state says. The state would not stone me to death for being unfaithful to my wife, but I would never be unfaithful to my wife because of my moral beliefs.

The church teaches us to stand on our own two feet, to be industrious and look after ourselves and our families properly. Then look to the needs of your neighbour if he needs help and so on throughout your wider community. I would argue that the modern welfare state is the opposite of what Christianity teaches. It discourages industry, it encourages people to take money without earning it which belittles the efforts of others and diverts resources from where they are genuinely needed. Nobody with a shred of decency would argue against helping those in genuine need, to ignore those in genuine need is inhuman and unchristian. But there is a better way.

Charity is a great cornerstone of Christianity. There is nothing more worthy than men helping others who are in need or are less fortunate than themselves. Sadly, in the twenty-first century charity is a dirty word to many people. How often do you hear: “No, I don’t want to accept charity thank you very much”? But that same person will be accepting state benefits. Aren’t state benefits merely charity that has been nationalised? Isn’t the welfare state a massively expensive, wasteful and bureaucratic nationalised charity? Doesn’t today’s modern welfare state encourage people to ignore others, encourage the breakup of communities by taking away our need to help and support each other because we know the state will provide? I see an alternative, improved service to that which the state currently provides as a Christian necessity and imperative, not on the grounds of cost, but on the grounds of providing the most effective service to those in need.

One of the questions I’m asked frequently is how I reconcile my Catholic position on abortion with being a libertarian. As with any philosophy there could be a great debate about the libertarian position on abortion, so I can only answer for myself. I believe that life begins at conception therefore, as a libertarian as well as a Catholic, I believe that abortion is the initiation of violence against another human being and is wrong. It is also the reason why, over recent years, I have changed my view on capital punishment, it seemed a strange contradiction to support death for adults but oppose the killing of unborn children.

I have no doubt that debate will rage within the Catholic Church and within the libertarian movement, as long as those two entities exist and man can walk and talk, about what they actually mean and represent. These are merely the views of somebody who does believe in Catholicism but has had years doubting, and even disbelieving, only to eventually return to the Church. Once a Catholic always a Catholic maybe. But I am also a libertarian who has always been a libertarian, even when I couldn’t put the name ‘libertarian’ to my political ideas in the late ‘70s early ‘80s.

Knowing Catholics and libertarians as I do, I have no doubt there will be those who agree with me and others who disagree, but neither will be shy at responding, and I welcome that.

Gregg Beaman

Gregg's Blog

The Libertarian Party

Why Robin Hood would NOT support The Robin Hood Tax

2010-03-30T14:36:00.004+01:00

For anyone who hasn't yet read about "The Robin Hood Tax" Campaign, which is supported by Christian Aid, Comic Relief, Friends Of The Earth, Green Peace, Oxfam, RSPB, The Salvation Army and Unite, along with countless other charities and organisation, the website is: www.robinhoodtax.org.uk

The Robin Hood Tax Campaign is calling for a 0.05% tax on all financial transactions that don't involve consumers. Sounds fair right? Not really. The tax is expected to raise $400 billion, out of $788 billion profits from the Banking Sector. My words for anyone who even slightly doubts that these tax charges will not reach us, the consumers, is "Get Real". Seriously just get real. To tax around 50% of a sector's profits, the sector that has helped build up the financial growth in this country, is dangerous and pretty discriminating.

The biggest joke of this whole campaign is that the legendary Robin Hood from Nottingham, fought AGAINST taxes! He fought against King Richard I's punitive taxes that helped fight the campaigns and wars of the bankrupt nation. And now his name is being used to campaign for a tax to help the campaigns and wars of a bankrupt nation. The mind boggles.

As Ed West from The Telegraph so eloquently puts it: "To name a tax in his honour is a bit like naming a sub-machine gun after Gandhi."

Lastly before anyone starts asking me intelligent questions about the UK Economy or the Financial Sector, I am not an Economist. These views are purely my rambles and observations.

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested in reading:
High Speed Tax

Share

My Top 5 Libertarian Songs

2010-03-28T15:06:00.005+01:00

As it is a Sunday afternoon, I thought I would do something a little different on my Blog. It has allways interested me how almost every song has an underlying meaning or message to get out, and the philosophy and belief of Libertarianism is no different. The following are "My Top 5 Libertarian Songs". Enjoy.

5 Gogol Bordello - Supertheory of Supereverything
Gogol Bordello's music may not to be your taste, you either love him or hate him. He is an Eastern European immigrant who has moved to New York and has become a huge success in the Gypsy Punk music scene over the last 10 years. In this song he sings of not trusting the established religions or faiths of the world. Even though this is not specifically a Libertarian belief, and their are a large proportion of Libertarians who are deeply religous, I think the message of not trusting large establishments is a fair one.

4 Pep's - Liberta
You don't have to be fluent in French to understand what Liberta may be translated into. He came from busking on the streets of Paris to now topping the French charts with this song. Singing of wanting to be free over some pretty beautiful melodies, I think this song shows the more peaceful, loving side of Libertarianism.

3 The Metros - Education Part 2
This song pretty much sums up everything that is wrong with our current education system and the way we treat young people. As someone who left the dreaded education system at 14 with a cycling proficiency being my only formal qualification to my name, this song speaks right at me.

2 The Kinks - 20th Century Man
I think you could safely swap "20th Century" with "21st Century" in this song and easily get away with it. They sing of global warfare, eroded privacy and even more eroded civil liberties. The best line in it by far has to be: "Got no privacy, got no liberty, 'cos the 20th Century people took it all away from me". As well as singing about encroaching Government powers, they also make the link between living in a Welfare State and having a lack of ambition and motivation.

1 Classified - All About You
This song just had to be number 1 for me. Aswell as being a pretty dam good song that I recently discovered, the messages within the lyrics are just beautiful and perfect. They highlight the way everything starts with the individual, and that actually it doesn't matter what other people say or do. Aslong as you are happy with the direction of your life, don't worry about what others say. "And you learn to cope, at the end of your rope, anyway that you can with liquor or dope, or work hard, raise your kids, strip clubs, whatever it is, smoke weed, shoot hoops, whatever you find you're happiest doing, its your life." So true, and well worth a listen.

Hope you enjoy, and ofcourse, do share your Libertarian inspired songs.

Share

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The UK Independence Party

2010-03-27T11:56:00.005Z

Tuesday: The Conservative Party
Wednesday: The Green Party

Thursday: The Labour Party

Friday: The Liberal Democrats
Saturday: The UK Independence Party

I believe you must never stop questioning your own beliefs, and must allways keep an eye on what your "competition" is doing right and wrong.

The UK Independence Party (UKIP)
www.ukip.org

The Good:

- The UK Independence Party, or UKIP as they are more commonly known as, is most known for one issue and one issue only. The European Union. It's why they were formed in the first place, and to see the UK leave the EU is their only ambition or use. UKIP has kept the EU in the public eye, for that I take my hat off to them. As for their method of working towards a UK out of the EU, that is questionable. Many would argue putting so much money and energy into the European Elections and making a pretty good living from working within the European Union is slightly hypocritical.

- UKIP is one of the loudest voices in Politics for the support of Home Education. Where as the other Parties run and hide behind "keeping children safe from their own parents", UKIP is very clear on where they stand. They believe parents and children know best when it comes to education, and not some do-gooder busy body in Westminster.

- Inline with their stance on promoting Democracy, UKIP also believes in elected Police chiefs. The idea of electing a County Police Chief, I think is a fantastic idea, and a way of making the connection between people and Police visible.

The Bad:

- Their stance on Immigration is way over the top and populist in nature. If elected they promise to have a 5 year freeze on immigration. They justify this complete block on incoming traffic by saying in that time they would get rid of all current illegal immigrants living and working within the UK. This whole policy just cannot work in practice though and would be hugely damaging for the British economy. If they were to scrap this ludicrous 5 year freeze policy, their immigration policy would be leaning towards OK.

The Ugly:

- The biggest problem with UKIP is how extreme and over the top they go with everything! Rather than be Anti EU, they let the EU dominate everything they talk about. For anyone who hasn't ever spoken to a UKIP member or supporter before, you will not fully understand just how EU obsessed these people are. You could be talking about your Nan in hospital, going on holiday to Tenerife, catching the bus into town or the verruca on your foot... they will find a way of mentioning the EU, promise. And yes I was a UKIP member before, but no I never got to the stage of having wet dreams every night about the EU, thankfully. As well as going over the top and becoming extreme about the EU, they also plan to ban the Burka, ban Al Gore's film "Inconvenient Truth", build more coal power stations and ban on land wind farms.

Thank you to everyone who has read through the last 5 Blog Posts and shared their views.
alexlpuk@live.co.uk

Share

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Liberal Democrats

2010-03-26T13:30:00.005Z

Tuesday: The Conservative Party
Wednesday: The Green Party

Thursday: The Labour Party

Friday: The Liberal Democrats
Saturday: The UK Independence Party

I believe you must never stop questioning your own beliefs, and must allways keep an eye on what your "competition" is doing right and wrong.

The Liberal Democrats
www.libdems.org.uk

The Good:

- The Liberal Democrats have allways striked me as a Local Party. They seem to do very well at local elections, and they hold just 400 less council seats than The Labour Party, with a total of over 4000 Lib Dem Councillors. As well as having electoral success locally, the Party seems to work well at a local level, with branches taking on alot of responsibility while campaigning on local issues.

- Nick Clegg, The Liberal Democrat leader, is the nearest thing to a true liberal in The Houses of Commons. As well as being culturally liberal he is also a market liberal and has been described as Libertarian leaning by many. I just find it a shame that the Party he represents can't also lean towards the Libertarian philosophy. As well as having a political viewpoint I can relate to, Nick Clegg has also allways seemed like a genuine, almost down to earth sort of politician.

The Bad:

- A vote for The Liberal Democrats is a vote for The Labour Party? This statement is being flung about quite a bit recently, mainly by scared Conservatives it has to be said, but how much truth is there in it? As I have said in the past, the outcome of the 2010 General Election will either be Red, Blue or a dirty mixture of Reddy-Blue. What can The Liberal Democrats really achieve in Westminster other than take votes away from The Conservatives? Is it worth having another 5 years of higher taxes, higher public debt and more civil liberties eroded for the sake of a few more Liberal Democrat MP's? Or is it worth having another 5 years of all those things, just to see David Cameron's smug face drop?

The Ugly:

- The Liberal Democrats opinion on The European Union is niether Liberal nor Democratic. As well as welcoming the flawed "Yes" vote in the Irish Referendum on The Lisbon Treaty, The Lib Dems also campaign for the UK to adopt the Euro. This is the Party's biggest downfall, and I still struggle to understand why a Party that has the words "Liberal" and "Democratic" in their name support such an illiberal, wasteful and undemocratic organisation such as The EU.

Tomorrow I discuss the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The UK Independence Party.

Share

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Labour Party

2010-03-25T15:18:00.012Z

Tuesday: The Conservative Party
Wednesday: The Green Party

Thursday: The Labour Party

Friday: The Liberal Democrats
Saturday: The UK Independence Party

I believe you must never stop questioning your own beliefs, and must allways keep an eye on what your "competition" is doing right and wrong.

The Labour Party
www.labour.org.uk

The Good:

- The Labour Party has dived head first into the world of online campaigning, and they have done it very successfully. While many Parties seem reluctant to venture online and harness the full potential of "E-Voters", Labour have managed to collect data on supporters from campaigns that range from Keeping the Hunting Ban, to Saving Sure Start.

The Bad:

- The Party itself has a problem with democracy. There have been many complaints within The Labour Party that members just aren't being listened to and that the National Party is making key decisions without consulting or even considering the opinions of "normal people". This is a serious fault of any Political Party. Without the grass roots support, you do not have a workable or manageable organisation. I am in the opinion that how a Party is run, says alot about how the country would be run during their term.

- They raised the tax on Cider.

The Ugly:

- During the last 13 years of a Labour Government our Civil Liberties have been grossly attacked and beaten, mostly in the name of "Health" and "Counter-Terrorism". In 2007 a report came out that concluded there are 266 ways a Government Official can enter your home. That is 266 ways the Government can enter your home. If there is anyone out there who wasn't even slighlty shocked/ disgusted by that, wherever or whenever you heard it first, you either work for the Government or like the idea of living in an Orwellian Society. I was planning on writing a short list of examples of how our Civil Liberties have been eroded over the last 13 years. However it would be niether short nor comprehensive enough for the true extent of how our liberties have been treated with so little respect since Labour winning in 1997.

I apologise for the lack of length in "The Good" section. I tried, I really did, but struggled to find anything worthy to write.

Tomorrow I discuss the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Liberal Democrats.

Share

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Green Party

2010-03-24T11:44:00.016Z

Tuesday: The Conservative Party
Wednesday: The Green Party

Thursday: The Labour Party

Friday: The Liberal Democrats
Saturday: The UK Independence Party

I believe you must never stop questioning your own beliefs, and must allways keep an eye on what your "competition" is doing right and wrong.

The Green Party

www.greenparty.org.uk

The Good:

- The Green Party understands the importance of decriminalising cannabis, and even has a policy on decriminalising the possession of small ammounts of other currently controlled substances. They would also commision a full review into all drug laws in the UK. This approach to controlled substances, I believe, is a very sensible one and shows intelligence and common sense rather than non-sensual, misconceptional dribble.

- One thing I have allways liked about The Green Party is the way they do not bow down to big businesses or corporations. I think it is refreshing to see a political party in the 21st Century which doesn't take large donations from either Unions or huge corporations. By The Green Party relying on private individual donations, they must take into consideration the views and opinions of their members and supporters far more than any other Political Party. This can only be a good thing.

- The Green Party's policy on our Armed Forces and Defence is fundamentally non-interventionalist. They believe the UK should never be aggressive in it's actions, only defensive, and that the budget for our remaining defence forces should be slashed. It all sounds just perfect to me.

The Bad:

- The Green Party still has an appaling image for being a socks and sandles party. In their campaign for The European Parliament Elections 2009, they did put alot of effort into squashing this accusation which proves they see it as a serious problem for their party.

The Ugly:

- Tax. Public Spending. Oh dear God. This is The Green Party's biggest downfall in my opinion. Their answer to everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, is to either tax it out of existence, or subsidize it uncontrollably. Some of their most damaging policies are: Regulate the Banking Industry even more, Monopolise the Rail Network under Government control, Continued and increased tax on alcohol and tobacco and finally colossal "eco-taxes" to force people to live the way the Green Government wants them to live. Disgusting.

Tomorrow I discuss the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Labour Party.

Share

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Conservative Party

2010-03-23T15:22:00.010Z

Every day for the next 5 days (starting Tuesday 23 March 2010 until Saturday 27 March 2010) I will Blog the good, the bad and the ugly of the 5 main UK Political Parties, in alphabetical order (and all in my opinion).

Tuesday: The Conservative Party
Wednesday: The Green Party
Thursday: The Labour Party
Friday: The Liberal Democrats
Saturday: The UK Independence Party

I believe you must never stop questioning your own beliefs, and must allways keep an eye on what your "competition" is doing right and wrong.

The Conservative Party
www.conservatives.com

The Good:

- The Conservative Party as it stands today is the most Eurosceptic Conservative Party ever. Their membership and their leadership is overwhelmingly Eurosceptic, compared to what they have been in the past. Many will claim that The Conservatives are Europhilic, Communist loving, European loving, Croissant munching liers. I think they are probably just a little less militantly Eurosceptic than others, but still fundamentally Eurosceptic.
"A Conservative Government would change the law so that never again would a government be able to agree to a Treaty that hands over areas of power from Britain to the EU without a referendum."

- A vote for The Conservative Party is a vote against the current Labour Party. Lets face it, it will either be Blue or Red at the next election, however much the less established parties try and claim it could be them moving into Westminster. I am in no way saying it is right that we seem to have a 2 Party System. A 2 Party system is one away from a 1 Party System.

- I believe The Conservative Party has achieved something many of the other parties haven't. Modernisation and Brand Recognistion. You may not have stood in awe and admiration when The Conservatives first released their cartoon tree into the Political world, but it has been a success. Their new logo and general design has modernised and refreshed the party to create the image of professionalism and clarity.

The Bad:

- They have failed to really capture and collect the animosity towards The Labour Party and turn that into supporters and future voters. I believe this is partly due to the fact very few normal, non-partisan voters actually know what The Conservative Party is standing for in this election. To me, The Conservative Party doesn't actually seem to be taking this election as seriously as it should do. This is their time to shine and show people what they stand for. Their campaign seems to be more of an Anti-Labour than a Pro-Conservative one. Ofcourse to some extent, the same can be said for The Labour Party and their General Election Campaign.

The Ugly:

- This is the Party of Maggie Thatcher. The iron lady who stole power away from Local Councils and people, and gave it to central Government in Westminster. Maybe Dave would like to explain a bit clearer how he will undo the devestating effects of Thatcher's reign?

Tomorrow I discuss the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Green Party.

Share

What can the Lib Dems bring to Canterbury?

2010-03-22T02:09:00.006Z

The above is a video by Canterbury Liberal Democrats for their Candidate in the General Election, Guy Voizey. I am afraid I find it dull and irksome. What can Voizey actually bring to the table that is positive for Canterbury? I failed to find this key point amongst the cringe worthily acted "I am a part of the community and buy all my groceries from local independent shops" footage. There lacked any sort of passion or belief in what he was actually saying.

I have attended a Public Meeting by Voizey and the local Lib Dems, and did actually find him to be quite a genuine and down to earth person. But is this all that is needed in today's current political climate? I fear not. I fear something more is needed to destroy The Conservative's 137 year hold on Canterbury.

I was hoping for more from The Liberal Democrats in Canterbury, rather than just some expensively produced and directed acted film.

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested in reading:
Thanet Sky Spy

Share

The 5 year Democracy Void

2010-03-17T19:43:00.004Z

So every 5 years the inevitable happens... Your letterbox gets bombarded with Politicial Literature/ Junk. Your doorbell may also be working overload with all the lovely canvassers and candidates "interested" in your opinion on how to make your community a better place. But you can sleep a little easier, in the knowledge that this happens only once every 5 years.

So what actually happens in those 5 years of peace and quiet? Do the elected candidates, who seemed so interested in your views running up to the election, come and have a chat to you? Do you actually get any say within those 5 years? Short Answer: No.

The Government seems quite interested in people's opinions and views on the run up to elections, but something strange happens to them all when they win. They stop listening. They stop caring. They seem to know best...

You can't even say that the British Public don't try and have their voice heard. The following are three examples of people trying to get their voices heard. None of the following examples actually made any difference.

15th February 2003- Anti War Protest, London.
750,000 people attended.
Result: Government went to War with Iraq.

22nd September 2002- Protest Against Hunting Ban, London.
400,000 people attended.
Result: Government Banned Hunting.

30th April 2007- Petition to Scrap Inheritance Tax.
128,622 Signatures.
Result: Government made no changes to Inheritance Tax.

Politicians do NOT know best. The Government does NOT know best. The people DO know best. What sort of a Democracy are we living in, where there is a 5 year Democracy Void?

I would ask you to sign a petition at this point, but from my research, it wouldn't make an awful lot of difference.

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested in reading:
Why Can't Political Parties Fight Elections on their own Merits?

Share

Colour In The BNP

2010-03-13T21:45:00.008Z

Above you will find a Black and White BNP Logo. You can print it off and colour it in, with whatever colours you wish, at your own leisure. Will it change what the Logo stands for though? No. (but who cares, everyone loves a bit of colouring in)

So now The BNP is being forced to accept "non-white" members into it's party. But does anyone really believe this will change the bigoted, out dated, white supremacy beliefs of the Party? If anything this new ruling will give all the homophobic, islamaphobic, xenophobic Nazi's in the party something to hide behind. "Equality" and "Intergration".

"We aren't racist! We have a few lovely chocolate coloured members!"

Would one of these new members include Mr Singh? Mr Singh told Sky News that: "The BNP was the only party he felt would take on the spread of Islamic fundamentalism, and save Britain"

Wonderful- not only do you have white islamaphobes, but you now have Sikh Islamaphobes.

But it is OK! Because at least you are now an intergrated Party that believes in Equality for all!

Enjoy your colouring in!

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested in reading:
The BNP are just UKIP in jeans

Share

High Speed Tax

2010-03-11T20:25:00.007Z

(Apologises it has been so long of not Blogging- I have been busy with real life)

Now I am all for innovation, the future and development. A high speed rail network connecting Europe, London, Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle and Scotland? YES. Well overdue in my opinion. The UK is so far behind the rest of the world when it comes to high speed rail.

The idea of going from London to Birmingham in under an hour kind of excites me slightly, in an odd perverse way. However, what does not excite me (in a perverse or non perverse way) is the cost to the taxpayer. £30 billion? Jog on. That is double what the current Department of Transport Budget is. Why is the Government so focused on "Public funded projects"?

Lord Andrew Adonis, Transport Secratery, says: "A high speed rail network in Britain will not evolve organically out of nowhere. It will only happen if Government has the foresight to start planning now."

His obssession with Publicly funded projects does the dream of high speed rail network no favours. All you need to do is look at The Channel Tunnel, and it's success, to see what can be achieved if people and businesses put there resources and expertise together, rather than expecting Government to do it for them.

This is the key point. If people could only get past their misconceptions that "I need the Government to do this for me", things could and do work. Whatever happened to the "power to the people" spirit? We do not need Government for everything in our lives. As human beings, and as a society, we can work together to acheive what WE want.

Say it once more... for me?
POWER TO THE PEOPLE.

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested in reading:
Energy Independence

Share

Will you be waving the flag?

2010-02-28T15:32:00.005Z

What we have seen happen in Vancouver (Winter Olympics) over the last few weeks can only be described as incredible. The raw patriotism has stunned journalists, politicians and Canadians themselves. The city has been transformed into a living, breathing mass of red and white maple leaves. People from the English, French and Native communities have all united under one banner to cheer on and support their athletes and their country. How will this Canadian pride compare to The London 2012 Olympics?

There are already sceptics and whingers in the UK about the Olympics. "It will cost too much money", "It will go over budget", "It won't be ready in time", "Our London Transport System cannot cope" blah blah blah...

I dread to see The Daily Whale's take on the Olypmics and how it has cost us too much, let too many johnny foreigners in and is a socialist scam. Why can't we all be proud of the fact that the Olympics is coming home?! This is a once in a lifetime oppurtunity to showcase the best of British. This is our chance to show the world who we are and what we stand for.

I am afraid that I hold a minority viewpoint when I say that I am quite looking forward to going up to London to see the Olympics and cheer on our athletes. Whether I will be dressed in Red, White and Blue and waving a Flag is a different matter though... I wonder whether it is actually necessary to drape myself in the Union Flag to support the Olympics and our athletes. Rather than seeing a frenzy of British Nationalistic flag waving, I would rather see us welcome the whole world into Britain. I would rather we all supported our athletes to the fullest capacity, but to congratulate those athletes on opposing sides who win, in a true sportsmanship manner.

The London 2012 Olympics holds so much potential and oppurtunity. I just hope that the Newspapers do not use it as an excuse to fabricate whingey stories to sell more copies. I also hope that Britain does get behind the Olympics and athletes in a supportive movement. We have alot to be proud of in Britain and London. Whether people wave a flag or not at the Olympics, I hope everyone uses the games to have fun and chill out.

If you enjoyed reading this Post, you may be interested to read:
Liberty in The Commonwealth

Less is More

2010-02-23T18:56:00.007Z

Less wheels is better than more wheels.
2 is better than 4.
Bikes are better than cars.

As a scooter rider myself I may be slightly biassed on this subject, however I do believe the campaign group "No to the Bike Parking Tax" gets very little media coverage. They are working and campaigning enormously hard against Westminster City Council, who have recently started charging Bikers for parking. The council insists it is just an experiment. No to the Bike Parking Tax are concerned about the possibility other Councils across the UK will follow suit, as an easy cash cow to boost finances.

However Westminster City Council, who have made £2.5million since setting up this "experiment", are not thinking of the consequences their actions will lead to. Motorbikes and Scooters are an absolute God send to inner city roads for the following reasons:

1- Congestion is heavily cut
While cars, buses and vans quee up neatly in rush hour, burning fossil fuels for the sake of burning fossil fuels, bikes can safely and easily filter through the traffic. Thus having no impact on the quees and congestions.

2- Far less damaging emmissions
As well as not wasting time burning fossil fuels at quees, they are also fundamentally more energy efficient. Some of the most efficient bikes and scooters go 90 miles to the gallon and more!

3- Take up far less space when parked
This goes without saying. You can park roughly 6 bikes into the space it would take to park 1 car.

4- Have a very low impact on the roads wear and tear
Cars are heavy. That is a no brainer. Heavy things make alot of impact on our inner city roads, and the bill for the repair of road surfaces comes back on all of us!

So, Westminster City Council are promoting and encouraging worse rush hours, more smoke in the air for our city dwellers and Ozone Layer to slowly choke on, less parking spaces and more pot holes! Good going Westminster...

Some of the fantastic work No to the Bike Parking Tax are doing includes giving advice on how to appeal bike parking tickets, direct objections to the Council and demonstrations.

Their regular demonstrations in Westminster have managed to grind the City to an absolute halt, as can be seen from these pictures:

I can all but hope Westminster City Council (and any other greedy Councils considering implementing Bike Parking Charges) start listening to No to the Bike Parking Tax and it's 1000's of supporters. It would be a great shame to our cities if we started loosing bike riders in favour of more cars and more congestion.

If you want anymore information on No to the Bike Parking Tax check out their website and Facebook Page!

www.notobikeparkingtax.com
Facebook Page

P.S.
(out of interest, next time you are out and about, count how many cars have less than 2 people riding in them)

UKIP hates Big Government (unless they're in charge)

2010-02-18T16:53:00.004Z

Oh yes, UKIP just despises big government. That is unless they are in charge of the big government! When they are in charge they positively frolic in the power over the people that finds it's way into their hands.

This is all according to their latest "Policy" called, "Restoring Britishness" (http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies/1447-restoring-britishness-ukip-policy). I'm sorry but who defines what it is to be British? No one. No one person or organisation has the right to tell us what it is to be British and how to be British. But alas, UKIP know the answer! They know how to get people all fired up with patriotism, waving flags and bowing to the Queen.

According to UKIP to be British is: "a belief in democracy, fair play and freedom, as well as traits such as politeness." Wonderful, I feel so much better now that someone has told me how to be British! In all seriousness though, how dare they. How dare they tell us what it is to be British. How dare they tell us how to be British. How dare they blame Islam and the "left wing" for all of Britain's current problems. Just bloody well HOW DARE THEY.

This whole "Restoring Britishness Policy" is dangerously similar to The Nazi Party policy in the 30's. Back then The Nazi Party blamed poverty, unemployment and the loss of World War I on the Jews and the left wing. However, they did not wish to scare off voters so kept their policy proposals pretty moderate in relation to what their real objectives were. Today, UKIP blame poverty, unemployment and global terrorism on Islam and the left wing.

Let me make it clear now, I am in no way saying that UKIP are anything as bad as The Nazi Party. This would be foolish, unfactual and ignorant. I am also not saying that the majority of UKIP members and supporters are Nazis. I am merely pointing out the similarities between the two in both their early stages of political life.

I have spoken to many UKIP members and supporters recently at all different levels of the Party Hierachy, and alot do actually agree that UKIP is moving in the wrong direction at the moment. So what are they doing about it? Bugger all.

UKIP and it's faithful membership needs to be very careful where this current direction of nationalistic policy making leads them...

4 day weekend?

2010-02-13T13:42:00.005Z

This is possibly the most rediculous thing I have heard in a long time. The Think Tank "The New Economics Foundation" is calling for a 21 hour working week. Thats less that half the current 48 hour working week. The Think Tank said it would make us better parents, better citizens, better carers and better nieghbours... (and poorer, lazier, more unproductive etc.)

They also said that the 21 hour working week would help get us out the recession, and ease unemployment. What about encouraging businesses to grow, start-up, expand and employ more people? Rather than putting even more restrictions and regulations onto UK businesses, we should be freeing up the market! I am not saying let big business run the country and control it's workers with an iron fist. I am talking about the man who owns a small workshop down the road and makes wooden chairs. He could employ a young college leaver to help him expand the business. However, he took one look at the forms and Health and Safety Regulations for employing a young person in a workshop and ran a mile. Now that college leaver is on Job Seekers Allowance and relies on Government handouts, rather than being self sufficient and employed in a job he is fully capable of doing. It just isn't economical or practical for small businesses to employ and expand.

As someone who is currently in the process of setting up a business, I do know there is "free" small business and start up help out there. And that help, provided by Local Regional Development Agency's, I have found to be quite helpful. However, I would much rather they let me get on with it. If it wern't for all these restrictive rules and regulations I actually wouldn't need any business advice or help and could have just gotten on with it. No fuss. No tax. Just business innovation and productivity.

I will leave you with a quote from The New Economics Foundation's Policy Director, Andrew Simms, in regards to a 21 hour working week. Proves how much of a joke this is to them:

"After all, hands up who wouldn't like a four day weekend?"

Why Can't Political Parties Fight Elections on their own Merits?

2010-02-06T13:11:00.005Z

On my long and trecherous surf through the World Wide Web, I found myself upon The Labour Party Website this morning. Nothing too out of the ordinary, I quite often visit Political Party Websites of all colours and creeds on my daily surf. However something struck me while on The Labour Party's Website. 3 out of 6 (50%) of their "News" Articles, were merely a bash at The Conservative Party.

This got me curious... So I quickly headed over to The Conservative Party Website. Exactly the same thing. 3 out of 3 (100%) of their "News" Articles were merely a bash at The Labour Party. Not only that, but on their homepage they also had another 2 mentions of "how awful" The Labour Party is and has been.

I have nothing against criticising Political Oponents. That is the wonderful thing about Democracy and Debate. However, surely it is way over the top when your Political Oponents dominate your Website and arguments. Do Labour and Conservative not have anything else to offer other than pure hate for each other?

Why can't Political Parties fight elections on their own merits?

Thanet Sky Spy...

2010-02-03T21:33:00.004Z

Is it right for Kent Police to operate Unmanned Spy Drones that can record clear images of people on the ground from up to 22,000ft in the air (invisible from the ground)?

Kent Police have been in discussions with BAE Systems, a global defence company, to discuss the possibility of operating these "Spy Planes" in the skies above The Isle of Thanet.

Andrew Mellors from BAE said: “Potential roles include maritime surveillance, road and railway monitoring, search and rescue support, harbour security, event security and media coverage, communications relays, major incident assessment, frontier security and covert urban surveillance.”

I can see the tremendous benefits in all of that. Apart from one. "Covert Urban Surveillance". What on earth would they want to do that for? Surely this vague use of words leaves the door wide open for interpretation from Kent Police as to what the Spy Plane is for. Speeding Motorists, Theft, Assault, Littering, your little old Auntie doing her weekly shopping? I mean seriously, this is basically a giant portable CCTV camera in the sky that is totally invisible to the naked eye and to innocent residents going about their day to day business.

Thanet Police Commander, Mitchell Fox has played down the Big Borther is watching you arguement, “To a degree the argument would be the same as Google Earth. We are governed by privacy laws and regulations but I can understand why people would be concerned if technology like this was developed.”

Well I would beg to differ with him. Google Earth and a Live CCTV Recorder in the sky operated by the Police Force are two very different things in my opinion. I think, like with so many good (and bad) ideas, this could all be so easily abused.

I suppose we shall just have to wait and see what occurs of these discussions, as to whether or not The Isle of Thanet is indeed blessed with a Spy Drone. (Oh no we won't... they can't be seen from the ground. We shall just have to wait for Kent Police to declare the outcome then, and trust our Privacy in their hands)

Energy Independence

2010-01-31T23:39:00.009Z

We all rely on Energy. Every single person in this country relies on electricity, oil, gas and even coal. From making that all important first cup of coffee in the morning, to driving to work, to checking your emails at work and then cooking your dinner in the evening. What source of energy we use is a question that merits a debate on itself and gets alot of attention. Where we get our energy from is the question that we never ask and the one I seek to answer in this Blog Post.

7 of the top 10 biggest companies in the world (by revenue) are Energy Companies. These 7 companies are: ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, BP Plc, Total S.A., Chevron Corp., Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. and Saudi Aramco. It is no coincidence that 7 of the top 10 biggest global companies are energy companies. They have us pinned.

We need energy. They make and sell energy.

So how do we break this dependency on huge global corporations (that some would say have unethical and environmentally damaging business practices)?

Simple. We build and organise our own Energy Independence. Local communities and individuals should be freed from National Government regulations on Energy Creation and Supply. My vision is of a Nation that is self efficient in energy, and green energy at that.

Local villages, towns and city nieghbourhoods could come together in a democratic bottom up hierarchy to decide for themselves how and where their energy is produced and ofcourse at what cost. With wind and solar energy research taking off in a big way right now, I believe it will only be a matter of time before wind turbines and solar panels are efficient, affordable and discreet. This will create even more Energy Independence for families and communities. My vision is of each house and each local community having their own Energy creation system, rather than a National Grid of Energy Suppliers controlled by Government and Companies.

This may all sound pie in the sky. But this is all possible. With less Government regulation, more self resposibility and community participation.

The benefits of local Renewable Energy Creation are numerous:

- The demolition of those hideous electricity pylons that blight our beautiful countryside
- The bringing together of local communities
- The loss of dependency on huge Global Corporations
- Vastly better for the environment on a local and global scale
(good for polar bears)
- A sense of pride, knowing and having a say in exactly how your energy is created

Rather than constructing huge offshore wind farms, investing billions into Nuclear or attempting to "green up" the image of coal powered stations, we need to think and work local as communities.

This is true Energy Independence.

My Defection from UKIP to The Libertarian Party

2010-01-20T18:37:00.002Z

I got involved with The UK Independence Party at the start of last year because I believed they were the only Eurosceptic, Libertarian UK Political Party and had the best chance of getting places.

I have been involved with The UK Independence Party for a year now. In that time I worked heavily locally at the European Elections June 2009. I helped out at the Norwich North By-Election in July where I met a wide array of UKIP supporters and members. In the next few weeks I was in the pipeline to becoming Canterbury and Coast UKIP Branch Secratery and Press Officer. I am also planning on standing in the 2011 Local Elections as the UK's youngest City Council Candidate, where if elected I will become the UK's youngest City Councillor ever at the age of 18years and 6 weeks old. I would have been proud to do this under the UKIP banner, however recent changes in the Party have made me loose alot of faith and support for the Party.

I cannot stand by and watch UKIP go down the road of attacking Islam and the Burka. (See previous Blog Post "The BNP are just UKIP in jeans"). I did not join UKIP with the intention of fighting a General Election on policies that smell identical to The BNP's.

For this reason, I have decided to shift my loyalty from The UK Independence Party to The Libertarian Party (UK). I believe The Libertarian Party hold true to my core values of self ownership, liberty, freedom and democracy. They may not be ready to get representatives elected at National, European or Local Elections yet, but with work, I feel they could be a strong voice for all true Liberals in the future in UK Politics.

I look forward to working with the team at The Libertarian Party, and would also like to thank everyone who has helped me along the way at UKIP, especially the local team around Canterbury, whom I have thanked and talked to in person about this.

Thank you.

The BNP are just UKIP in jeans

2010-01-16T16:11:00.003Z

The fear when Lord Pearson got elected as the new Leader of The UK Independence Party was that UKIP would turn into a BNP Lite. Well, it seems that hasn't happened. In fact I would now say that BNP is the watered down version of UKIP.

Lord Pearson has called out for the ultimate ban on the Burka and Niqab:
“We are taking expert advice on how we could do it. It makes sense to ban the burka — or anything which conceals a woman’s face — in public buildings. But we want to make it possible to ban them in private buildings. It isn’t right that you can’t see someone’s face in an airport.”

Sound a bit extreme banning the Burka in Public and PRIVATE places (eg. your home)?
Well it sounds even more extreme when you compare it to the BNP's policy on the Burka:

BNP- Ban the Burka in all Schools.

UKIP- Ban the Burka in all public and private buildings

Lord Pearson: “We are not Muslim bashing, but this is incompatible with Britain’s values of freedom and democracy.”

The value of freedom and democracy is indeed a fantastic value to have, I agree. It is a shame how ignorant and thoughtless his comment is in context to what he is actually saying.

Lord Pearson's personal war on Islam is disgusting and unforgivable. This should not be happening in what was a Eurosceptic, Libertarian leaning Political Party in the 21st Century.

The Conservatives out of touch!

2010-01-11T19:54:00.008Z

It has been 5 years since the Hunting Act 2004 came into effect, banning the hunting of live quarry with a pack of hounds. It has taken 1 "Parliament Act" (something that had only happened four times since 1949), which was used to over ride the House of Lord's vote. And this whole fiasco has taken up 700 hours of Parliamentary time.
Yet after all this... the debate on Fox Hunting just will not go away it seems!

Firstly, I would like to mention as many of you already know, that I myself do follow a Hunt. I follow East Kent Hunt on foot (because there is no way I could afford to ride at a hunt), and I usually go with friends and family. For me it is a social get together on a Saturday morning to meet up with people, see the horses, the hounds and the beautiful countryside.

I am not writing this to start up another seemingly never ending debate on the morals, economics, welfare, environmental and social class effects of the Hunting Act.

I am instead writing this to express my opinion that The Conservative Party has, in my opinion, made a fatal political mistake. They have made the mistake of pushing the Repeal of the Hunting Act 2004 to the top of their General Election 2010 manifesto. Why?

The Financial Crisis, Public Spending, The Environment, Civil Liberties, European Intergration, Immigration, Democracy and Political Accountability. These are all issues on voter's minds right now! The debate on Fox Hunting is NOT a big issue right now for the high majority of British people, including the majority of the 1.2 million people who attend Hunts in this country!

And ofcourse, The Labour Party have not missed out on the chance to attack The Conservatives for their strong Pro Hunting agenda.

Back The Ban ( http://www.backtheban.com/home ) is their newest campaign which will get alot of support from across the nation and which will, I believe, be yet another downfall of The Conservative Party.

Let Islam4UK march through Wootton Bassett!

2010-01-07T22:45:00.007Z

If you haven't heard about the planned Islam4UK march through Wootton Bassett than you have probably been living in a cave for the last few weeks. I will now go totally against public opinion and say...

"I, Alex Ellis-Roswell, believe Islam4UK should be allowed to go ahead with their planned march"

WOA.
SHOCK HORROR.

"TRAITOR" I hear you cry.
No. Now let me explain my reasons behind this "preposterous" view point.

First, please take the time to read Islam4UK's official statement:

"Islam4UK, a platform for the global front Al-Muhajiroun, would like to announce the launch of a momentous march that is scheduled to take place in the following weeks, details of which will be released shortly inshaa'allah (God willing).

The destination of this very special event is the small market town of Wootton Bassett, located 6 miles Southwest of Swindon, in northern Wiltshire; Wootton Bassett, is currently famous for its public mourning processions held in memory of British soldiers killed whilst on military service in Afghanistan; coffins containing the dismembered bodies of these soldiers are usually draped in union jack flags and driven through the town centre from RAF Lyneham, as a tribute to their ‘sacrifice'.

The proposed march by members of Islam4UK is however of a very different venture, held not in memory of the occupying and merciless British military, but rather the real war dead who have been shunned by the Western media and general public as they were and continue to be horrifically murdered in the name of Democracy and Freedom - the innocent Muslim men, women and children.

It is quite extraordinary, that with well over 100,000 Muslims killed in Afghanistan in the last 8 years that those military serviceman who have directly or indirectly contributed to their death are paraded as war heroes and moreover honoured for what is ultimately genocide.

We at Islam4UK find this totally unacceptable and as a result have decided to launch the ‘Wootton Bassett March' to highlight the real casualties of this brutal Crusade."

I cannot say I disagree with a single word that is written in that statement by Islam4UK. The innocent Middle Eastern men, women and children who are now dead because of British Military action in their own nations is so under publicised. You never hear of the figure for how many innocent Middle Eastern's are killed because of our senseless war out there. So, why not let them mourn their dead in a public way...

I would just like to point out, that I personally, do not agree with Islam4UK's main objective. This is to change British public opinion in favour of the Islamic ideology. But, just because I personally don't agree with their ideology and objectives does not mean I would like to see them banned, deported or silenced. They have just as much right to freedom of speech and expression as you or I do in this country.

Roll on the hate mail.
alexukip@live.co.uk

Not so high above the law anymore...

2009-12-23T06:37:00.005Z

Well the inevitable has finally happened. The Government has outlawed yet more "drugs", which as far as yesterday was concerned were called "legal highs". But no, they just can't stand us having any sort of freedom or choice. The now Class C substances, including GBL and BZP, now carry a minimum of 2 year prison sentence and 14 years for supply. Amongst the legal highs to be banned last night were "synthetic cannabis" which is now classed as a Class B.

Police will now start to target dealers of these new illegal substances, diverting their attention away from real crimes. And ofcourse the joke of all this is that these once "legal highs" are manufactured by man made chemicals specifically designed to act like the criminilised drugs, but without the risk of a prison sentence. It is an unstoppable cycle of supply and demand. The solution is simple, if not quite controversial.

Drugs should be a personal choice, legalised by the Government. If an adult wants to destroy their body using substances, then let them. The Government does NOT own your body! YOU own your body!

Liberty in The Commonwealth

2009-12-16T11:38:00.005Z

Uganda is the latest out of 37 other African Nations to criminalise homosexuality. Uganda's new "Anti Homosexuality Bill 2009" will make it a crime, punishable by death, to "defile homosexuality". Why then? Why now is Africa slipping into pre-1950's Europe? The days when there were death penalties, anti gay laws and Political Extremism . David Bahati, a Ugandan MP, says "The whole intention is to prevent the recruitment of under-age children, which is going on in single-sex schools. We must stop the recruitment and secure the future of our children."

Africa, in my view, is not moving forward. Instead it's Leaders are dragging it backwards into a dark totalarian continent which controls the people. In most cases, I wold argue a country has the full right to do whatever the hell they want, without foreign intervention. However Uganda is a different case. Uganda is a member of The Comonwealth, which according to the "Singapore Declaration of Commonwealth Principles", is there to promote democracy, HUMAN RIGHTS, good governance, the rule of law, INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, egalitarianism, free trade, multilateralism and world peace.

Human Rights and Individual Liberty? Punishment for expressing your sexuality?
Surely the two do not go hand in hand. Surely The Commonwealth can intervene and talk to the Ugandan Parliament about this new Bill? Something must be done to stop this huge injustice, in my opinion. My respect for The Commonwealth will lower if they do nothing to help Liberty in Uganda.

Which Century is UKIP in?

2009-12-12T11:04:00.010Z

The first port of call for a huge proportion of the UK population is the internet these days... See something during the day that interests you and you will more than likely either whack out your phone with mobile internet, or google it later on when you get home. First impressions are everything. The UKIP website looks like something straight out of the 90's. This puts UKIP firmly in the Century of the first man on the Moon, the Cold War and Thatcher. UKIP's website should at least attempt to join the Millenium, the Century of personal technology boom, global terrorism and the first black President of USA.

So, as an amateur website designer, what is my first impression of the UKIP website?
(www.ukip.org)

- Too many clashing primary colours. Its like a primary school's paint pallet.

- Too many links on front page. The majority of these links are irrelavent to a first time user. As someone who has never herd of UKIP before, I want to be able to find the party's policies and views quickly and effortlessly (without getting a brain siezure from all the dazzling bright colours)

- The front page doesn't appear to be regularly updated. And when it is, the articles/ features look rushed and thrown together (with some more primary bright colours chucked in, just in case you can't find them amongst all the other shades of the rainbow)

- The navigation and ease of use on the site is probably the worst I've ever seen from a major national website in the UK.

OK- so now lets compare with other UK national political party websites, and see what they're doing right:

**********

Labour Party
http://www.labour.org.uk/

- Very easy navigation. I can donate, join and find my local branch and events, all on the front page.
- They haven't swamped the front page with party news. I can easily see National and Local Labour Party news.
- They have one nice large graphic picture at the top of the page, representing a news story. However it isn't in my face with bright colours. It just looks smart.
- Labour Party videos are laid out on the page exceptionally well. They're not cluttered and I can see a brief description and send to my facebook.

**********

Conservative Party
http://www.conservatives.com/

- Lots of innovative media sources to check out here! Conservative Blogs and Videos included.
- A mobile phone number and email address collector at the bottom right hand corner. I can imagine this would be extremely helpful to the Party. It is also the first UK political party website I have seen that collects mobile numbers.
- Not the clearest of navigation on this site, but aesthetically pleasing.

**********

Liberal Democratic Party
http://www.libdems.org.uk/

- The movement of the article scroller at top of page adds interest to the front page.
- Easy to see what they stand for and to find out more in depth about their policies on specific issues.
- Some very nice, clear graphics have gone into this website.

**********

Green Party
http://www.greenparty.org.uk/

- I can see instantly what their 6 main policies are on the front page, and can click throught to learn more in depth about each one of them.
- The white background makes the front page look much clearer and makes it easier to use.
- I can join, donate and find my local Green Party easily, all from the front page.

**********

I believe the UK Independence Party National Website could be good. Heck, it could even be great! But first, whoever is in charge of the site, needs to really look at the other political party websites. They need to find the best bits from each one, drop the bad bits and VOILA.
UKIP will have an easy to use, clear and content rich website, from which the party's online presense can grow and improve.

Burn Cops - Not Coal!

2009-12-10T22:56:00.001Z

I had a friend attend the Copenhagen protest in London on 5th December with all his hippy mates. Nothing wrong with that. However along with the tens of thousands of climate change protesters that day, there were apparently, a small group of Anarchists joining in. Again, nothing wrong with that. However the slogan they were shouting within this protest somewhat fuddles me.

Their protest call was: "Burn Cops - Not Coal"

Nothing too wrong with that view in my opinion, if anything a little too extreme for my own liking. However I wonder if these Anarchists genuinely realise the true meaning of Copenhagen. In writing a room full of world leaders all sitting down and discussing how to best deal with climate change sounds fantastic. But this is so not the case.

What the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference is all about is actually the world's political elite sitting around hot airing about an awful lot of nothing. Their ultimate aim is to get some sort of treaty between all the nations agreed, to commit governments across the globe to cut CO2 etc.
In the highly unlikely event such an agreement materialises, how will these governments stick to their promises? More Laws. More Regulation. More Government.

The Anarchists got it wrong. Surely they cannot be in favour of more Government control?
Maybe it was just a stunt to get publicity for their cause for "burning cops"... If so, it kind of worked, 'cos theyv'e just had a blog dedicated to them.
Good on 'em.

In Conclusion:

The idea of Copenhagen is not a bad idea. It just doesnt work in practice. The ammount of harmful gases pumped into the atmosphere, including CO2, as a direct result of the Copenhagen Summit far out weighs the benefits that it may produce for the Climate Change cause.

My opinion on how to protect the enviroment, like with alot of subjects, is to start from the bottom up. Rather than the World's Elite making decisions on the enviroment, we the people can do far greater good (or bad). I am not about to preach to you on how to cut your Carbon Footprint, that's just lame. My point is simple. And, I believe, my point is a fair one to make.

Alex Ellis Roswell LPUK

Tax Cuts, Not HS2

Free Britain February/ March 2011

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #1 Leave the EU

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #2 Cut Tax

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #3 Legalise Drugs and Prostitution

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #4 Withdraw Troops from Conflict

5 Deficit Busting Brainwaves: #5 Scrap International Aid

Egyptian Revolution

We can learn so much from Sweden's forests

Blueprint for a Safe, Enterprising and Modern UK Sex Industry

Cameron, Clegg and Osborne sitting in a tree V.A.T.T.I.N.G.

My Top 5 of 2010

Claire Khaw UNCOVERED

Fresh Enthusiasm for South East Libertarians

Andrew Withers Elected New Leader

Libertarian Council Candidate Welcomes Freeze on Council Tax

Beer Economics

Can I please change generations?

The Importance of Guns and Shooting

A Tragic Waste of Life

Please Don't Tell Me What I Can and Can't Wear

Michael Moore: A Hypocritical Story

F*ck W*nk T*t Libertarians

I support Free Speech, but not your Free Speech

'Cos it's cool to hate Dave "init"

Mr Prime Minister?

I have found the cure to insomnia!

Hitler's milky moustache

Who is this George anyway?

A Libertarian(-ish) 2010 General Election Manifesto

Presenting you with: Mao Ze Brown!

The Rainbow Vote

Has UKIP Done The Right Thing At Last?

This Is Why Young People Don't Vote!

Being a Catholic Libertarian By Gregg Beaman

Why Robin Hood would NOT support The Robin Hood Tax

My Top 5 Libertarian Songs

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The UK Independence Party

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Liberal Democrats

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Labour Party

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Green Party

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of: The Conservative Party

What can the Lib Dems bring to Canterbury?

The 5 year Democracy Void

Colour In The BNP

High Speed Tax

Will you be waving the flag?

Less is More

UKIP hates Big Government (unless they're in charge)

4 day weekend?

Why Can't Political Parties Fight Elections on their own Merits?

Thanet Sky Spy...

Energy Independence

My Defection from UKIP to The Libertarian Party

The BNP are just UKIP in jeans

The Conservatives out of touch!

Let Islam4UK march through Wootton Bassett!

Not so high above the law anymore...

Liberty in The Commonwealth

Which Century is UKIP in?

Burn Cops - Not Coal!

Fck Wnk T*t Libertarians