Election of the Speaker of the House of commons

Members of Parliament just don't understand the Public mood and are today running a farcical election for a discredited role in the House of Commons.

The election of a new Speaker is an absolutely farcical situation, as the role of the Speaker needs reform not just a new face.

Amongst the urgently needed reforms of the role of the Speaker includes the function as the Chair of The Members Estimate Committee, which should not remain in the remit of the House of Commons. The Members Estate Committee considers matters relating to MPs’ pay and allowances on behalf of the House of Commons.

The front runners for the position include: John Bercow, A regular house flipper and a man who is a consultant to a Cayman Island registered business. One tax break after another, just the style of speaker we need; Sir Alan Beith, who together with his wife claimed £178 000 in second home allowances including a claim for a £5 457 kitchen. He also claimed just over £6 000 in food expenses between 2005 and 2008, what a breath of fresh air he would be; Margaret Beckett, claimed for almost £11,000 in gardening expenses, including £1,380 for plants, she said that a £600 claim in 2005, which was rejected by the fees office, had been 'a mistake', funnily enough she had made three similar claims between 2001 and 2003, sounds like just the decent, honest hardworking MP to head the Members Estate Committee we need.

Members of Parliament almost daily are managing to show complete contempt to the British Public, the farce of the election of a new Speaker being just the latest in a long line. The body politic becomes more remote and less relevant to the needs of the United Kingdom as each day passes.

read more “Election of the Speaker of the House of commons”

Part 2 of the Civil Contingencies Act and Swine Flu

After a lengthy delay, I finally received a response to my question posed in April about the CCA as to:

- Whether, as part of the planning for a declaration by the World Health Organization that this is a flu pandemic, the Government is considering activating Part 2 of the CCA

- if the CCA does form part of the strategy to deal with the pandemic (if declared), at what level of infection in the UK is the Government intending to enforce this Act?

As you can tell from the question, this was posed some time ago, as the outbreak has now been confirmed as a pandemic.

Gillian Merron, Minister of State in the Department of Health, who responded to the enquiry stated that the DoH, Health Protection Agency and Cabinet Office are working together to ascertain at what level of infection Government intervention would be necessary and when and how to bring forward legislation to manage public resources, adding Part 2 of the CCA is one option for delivering some of the measures under consideration.

Gillian further comments on the 'triple lock' mechanism which would need to be met before Part 2 of the Act was brought in to force. These test being:

- an emergency that threatens serious damage to human welfare, the environment or security has occurred, is occurring or is about to occur

- it is necessary to make provision urgently in order to resolve the emergency

- the emergency regulations are proportionate

Whether or not Swine Flu reaches the stage whereby Emergency Powers under the CCA is invoked or not, is something of a sideline. The real concern, is that an outbreak of Flu is deemed by the Government as a potential trigger for the Act to come in to force, which demonstrates, the way in which legislation introduced in a climate of 'fear' becomes a dangerous tool in the hands of politicians.

The 2004 revision of the CCA Scope of emergency regulations provide draconian powers to the State; the General Public have no safeguards or rights when the Act is enforced.

read more “Part 2 of the Civil Contingencies Act and Swine Flu”

Did political parties forget there was an election?

In the run up to the recent Euro and local council elections, the apathy displayed by political parties was all too apparent.

No one canvassed at the door and only the Conservatiove Party bothered to post any information about the local election candidate through the door. The leaflet presented gave absolutely no contact information for the candidate. After numerous calls to the Conservative central office, the Local Party Office, which was shut, the local Conservative club and the office in the House of Commons of the local MP, I eventually received a call from the candidate.

I attempted to make contact with the prospective Liberal Democrat for the seat and although I managed to speak to the leader of the Liberal Democrats for the local council and elicited a promise of a returned call, I received nothing back at all.

The Euro elections fared no better, again no canvassing.

An information leaflet from the Green Party came with a telephone number. I called to ask a question and was assured I would be called back, of course I wasn't.

I spoke to UKIP, who also provided a telephone number on their leaflet, my question was met with a response that the policy in question wasn't actually currently formulated, but a working party was considering the issue. At least I received a reply, useless though it was.

The Conservative party leaflet contained no telephone number, but at least there was a number on the central party website. Once again a promise of a returned call resulted in nothing.

The Labour party leaflet provided an sms service, but no telephone number, scouring their central website gave no contact telephone number.

The liberal Democrats couldn't be bothered to send through a leaflet.

The Christian Democrats managed to get a leaflet through, but again there was no contact number.

That was the extent of the interest political parties had in obtaining my vote.

Until such time a politicians do more than pay lip service to communicating, I fail to see what and how they intend to 'engage' the general public.

For the record: I didn't vote and never have done. I do not support the UK Democratic system, which is neither Democratic nor representative.

read more “Did political parties forget there was an election?”

Civilised interrogation, most people call it torture

Americans hang your heads in shame, this has been done on behalf of 'freedom'.

read more “Civilised interrogation, most people call it torture”

The UK is just an American State

Diego Garcia, the island which has been used for extra-ordinary rendition, is part of the British Indian Ocean Territory, an archipelago of 55 islands which covers 54,000 sq km of ocean. The islands have a land area of 60 sq km.



The territory is overseen by a Commissioner and Administrator who are based in London. The Commissioner's Representative in the BIOT is the commanding officer of the British Royal Navy Party at Diego Garcia and who serves as the Justice of the Peace.

In the mid-1960s, Britain secretly leased Diego Garcia to the United States for 50 years, in exchange for a discount of US$11million on Polaris nuclear submarines. The deal was not disclosed to the US Congress, the British Parliament, or the United Nations. A memo from then Foreign Secretary Michael Stewart to Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson in 1969 admitted that the payment was kept secret from Parliament and the US Congress.However, America accepted only on condition that the islands were uninhabited. As a result, over the next few years the 1 200 inhabitants of the Chagossian Islands were forced to leave and sent to either Mauritius or the Seychelles in 1971, Britain made it official with an Immigration Ordinance denying the Chagossians the right to return. In 1978 Chagossians were each paid twenty pounds in compensation.

The constitutional arrangements for BIOT are set out in the British Indian Ocean Territory ( Constitution) Order 2004 and related instruments. The 2004 Order gives the Commissioner full power to make laws for the Territory. A series of UK/US Agreements regulate matters relating to the use of the Territory for defence purposes, such as jurisdiction over US military and other personnel.

Despite numerous court cases, which appeared to set the Chagossians able to return home in 2008 the Foreign Office successfully argued, that allowing the Chagossian islanders to go back to their Indian Ocean homes would be a "precarious and costly" operation, and the United States had said that it would also present an "unacceptable risk" to its base on Diego Garcia.

While Diego Garcia remains leased to the USA, Britain retains no control over the island, nor over the whole of BIOT. The fact that BIOT law is meant to be precedent in the Islands, yet evidently is interpreted to suit American desires, is a sad indictment of the way the UK continues to cede to American supremacy over the Sovereignty of the UK.

The Government has claimed 'the UK expects the US to seek permission before rendering detainees through British territory'. The US evidently don't really care what the UK expects as it has transpired that at least two rendition flights landed in Diego Garcia, about which the US didn't bother to inform the UK.

Having broken their lease by not informing the UK of this use, the US should be kicked off the island, but of course that wont happen.

The British Government used Orders of Council rather than statute, to continue to following the American demands in 2004. Jack Straw, then Foreign Secretary, signed the exclusion orders. He was subsequently asked how he now justifies the decision to deny the Chagossians the right to return to their home. He replied ‘..It was a difficult decision with two alternatives: whether to do it by Orders in Council or by statute….it was simpler to use Orders in Council...’ He was then asked ‘..Do you think the Chagos islands decision should have gone at least before the the Foreign Affairs Select Committee of the House of Commons?’ Mr. Straw replied ‘In retrospect, yes. I think, with the benefit of hindsight, that what I exchanged was speed for legitimacy.’

The British version of elected dictatorship is discredited both in domestic and international affairs.

read more “The UK is just an American State”