Democratic Deficits in both the EU and the UK

As an active campaigner during the 2016 referendum I argued passionately for the UK to leave the EU. I campaigned not from the right, but as a member of Green Leaves, the Leave campaign supporting Green Party policies. Until the recent volte-face by the leadership, the Green Party had long been a Euro-sceptic party, its policies reflecting the Party's unease at the undemocratic nature of the EU.

Indeed the number one issue I discussed with voters on the doorstep and in meetings during the referendum was not immigration, but the lack of democracy in the EU.

As the former European Commission president José Manuel Barroso (now employed by big EU lobbyists Goldwin Sachs) said in 2007: “. . . I like to compare the EU as a creation to the organisation of empire. We have the dimension of empire.”

The European Commission is the most powerful pillar of a complicated EU structure. According to the Economist magazine it is "it is the guardian of the treaties, the originator of almost all legislation and the sole executor of the EU’s budget." But its members are appointed rather than elected. From Brexit to CETA it is always the Commission that represents the EU.

The parliament is made up of elected MEPs from across Europe, but it is a weak parliament, with no real power over legislation. Indeed the majority of the legislation drafted by the Commission is not discussed in detail in the EU Parliament before it is enacted. From there it goes directly into domestic UK law. Even arch remainer Nick Clegg admitted that: "probably half of all new legislation now enacted in the UK begins in Brussels."

Meanwhile, EU citizens are led to believe they are voting for true representation in Brussels, when in fact they are voting for a weak Parliament unable to fundamentally change EU policy set by the Commission. Realisation of this has led to disillusionment amongst EU voters. Less than half the EU electorate bothered to vote in the last European Parliament elections. Indeed, many national parliaments have cast doubt on the European Parliament’s democratic credentials, as has the German constitutional court.

The real power in the EU lies with the undemocratically appointed Commission. To put it another way, power is vested in an unelected and unaccountable elite who make laws to preserve the status of their paymasters in large multinationals. Multinationals achieve this preferential status by spending enormous sums of money on lobbying. With over 30,000 corporate lobbyists in Brussels, they are estimated to influence 75% of European legislation. Large numbers of former Commission staff (like José Manuel Barroso) end up employed by these large corporations.

A classic example of this was CETA, the Canadian/ EU trade agreement, which not even MEPs were allowed to scrutinise before its final draft. One of the strongest arguments against CETA and TTIP (the US/EU agreement abandoned by Trump), made by Green Party leader Caroline Lucas and others, was that the structure of dispute resolution, in the form of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system, was biased in favour of multinational companies. It allowed corporate lawyers to be the final arbiters in disputes between business and governments, usually upholding the right of business to make a profit in all circumstances. Other criticisms of the system are that it’s secret, that it’s dominated by unaccountable big-firm lawyers, and that global corporations use it to change sovereign laws and undermine regulations.

Both Labour and Green Party leaders appear to be ignoring the fact that any new trade deal between the EU and the UK would also have to have a dispute settlement arrangement. It has been shown that ISDS has increasingly become a way for rich investors to make money by speculating on lawsuits, winning huge awards and forcing taxpayers to foot the bill. All of which is a long way from the democratic will of the people.

The democratic deficit in the EU is indisputable, but to be consistent we must also address the democratic deficit within the UK.

Two thirds of the votes cast in the last general election were wasted, in that they made no difference to the outcome of the election.

In the UK's undemocratic "first past the post" electoral system, most constituency MPs are voted in by a minority of the electorate and often more people vote for opposition candidates than for the winner.

The democratic case for Brexit has no legitimacy without electoral reform of the UK parliament to ensure it accurately represents the British people, something this appalling minority Tory government clearly fails to do.

Power should rest not with Parliament, but with the British people. That means not only respecting the outcome of the EU referendum, but also ensuring that Parliament properly represents the electorate in direct proportion to citizens' political opinions. True Democracy depends upon proportional representation (PR).

I cannot agree with the Tory Brexiteer who said that the British people fought in two world wars to uphold the supremacy of the House of Commons. They fought for democracy, which was why the most reforming British government in the 20th century immediately followed World War 2.

The time is right for a new reforming Government, elected by PR and using the limitless possibilities given by Brexit to truly reflect the hopes and aspirations of the British people.

A New Green Direction after #Brexit

As the Financial Secretary of Green-Leaves, I naturally applaud the decision of the British people to vote to Leave the EU.

It gives the Green Party an opportunity for a new more radical direction, developing on existing priorities for campaigning. In addition, Cameron's resignation, coupled with the police enquiries into Tory electoral fraud gives us an excellent opportunity to curtail this appalling Tory administration and call for a general election.

Those priorities, I believe, should be, as follows:

1. The UK having addressed the democratic deficit in the EU, our next priority should be to address the democratic deficit in the UK. We should call for immediate discussions on electoral reform to give the people of the UK a more representative voting system. We got this referendum because of internal Tory Party squabbles and a weak Prime Minister who promised the EU referendum in the clear expectation that he would not get a majority in the House of Commons in 2015 and not then have to deliver on that promise. Now literally hoisted on his own petard, the Green Party should take this opportunity to attack the electoral system that got him elected with the support of less than one quarter of the electorate and demand proportional representation.

2. Similarly we should renew our campaign for the abolition of the House of Lords and the creation of a new elected senate.

3. The Green Party in England & Wales should support the demands for a new independence referendum in Scotland and a referendum for a United Ireland.

4. One of my greatest criticisms of the position of the Green Party over Europe is that we seemed to have forgotten our basic message of replacing a pro-growth consumer society with a society wedded to conserving our environment. We have been told many times that if the world wishes to avoid exceeding the 2°C, then the wealthiest countries have to adopt a de-growth strategy for a limited period. We should return to our roots and actively campaign for a de-growth economic policy.

5. That would embrace localism in our procurement policies for schools, hospitals and other public institutions, like the military. Making it a virtue of buying local preferably organic food.

6. Step up our opposition to the creeping privatisation of the NHS, especially now that the Tories will no longer have the excuse of EU neo-liberal policies on procurement.

7. Given the new spirit of rebellion engendered in the EU by the UK's unprecedented rejection of the arguments put forward by international vested interests, I believe TTIP is now dead. Obama has already promised that the UK will be put to the "back of the queue" regarding a free trade agreement and we can carve out a unique position by opposing ALL UK free trade agreements.

8. Point out that leaving the EU does not mean that we have to leave the European Court of Human Rights, which is a separate and older institution. Indeed we can champion the Court in our opposition to Tory attempts to water down our rights.

9. Try to develop an electoral pact with the Corbyn wing of the Labour Party, to increase the possibility of a truly socialist and progressive UK Government, to reverse the Thatcherism and austerity favoured by all successor governments since Thatcher, both Labour and Tory.

In this way we can renew and envigorate the Green Party by following this more radical agenda.

A New Green Direction after #Brexit

As the Financial Secretary of Green-Leaves, I naturally applaud the decision of the British people to vote to Leave the EU.

It gives the Green Party an opportunity for a new more radical direction, developing on existing priorities for campaigning. In addition, Cameron's resignation, coupled with the police enquiries into Tory electoral fraud gives us an excellent opportunity to curtail this appalling Tory administration and call for a general election.

Those priorities, I believe, should be, as follows:

1. The UK having addressed the democratic deficit in the EU, our next priority should be to address the democratic deficit in the UK. We should call for immediate discussions on electoral reform to give the people of the UK a more representative voting system. We got this referendum because of internal Tory Party squabbles and a weak Prime Minister who promised the EU referendum in the clear expectation that he would not get a majority in the House of Commons in 2015 and not then have to deliver on that promise. Now literally hoisted on his own petard, the Green Party should take this opportunity to attack the electoral system that got him elected with the support of less than one quarter of the electorate and demand proportional representation.

2. Similarly we should renew our campaign for the abolition of the House of Lords and the creation of a new elected senate.

3. The Green Party in England & Wales should support the demands for a new independence referendum in Scotland and a referendum for a United Ireland.

4. One of my greatest criticisms of the position of the Green Party over Europe is that we seemed to have forgotten our basic message of replacing a pro-growth consumer society with a society wedded to conserving our environment. We have been told many times that if the world wishes to avoid exceeding the 2°C, then the wealthiest countries have to adopt a de-growth strategy for a limited period. We should return to our roots and actively campaign for a de-growth economic policy.

5. That would embrace localism in our procurement policies for schools, hospitals and other public institutions, like the military. Making it a virtue of buying local preferably organic food.

6. Step up our opposition to the creeping privatisation of the NHS, especially now that the Tories will no longer have the excuse of EU neo-liberal policies on procurement.

7. Given the new spirit of rebellion engendered in the EU by the UK's unprecedented rejection of the arguments put forward by international vested interests, I believe TTIP is now dead. Obama has already promised that the UK will be put to the "back of the queue" regarding a free trade agreement and we can carve out a unique position by opposing ALL UK free trade agreements.

8. Point out that leaving the EU does not mean that we have to leave the European Court of Human Rights, which is a separate and older institution. Indeed we can champion the Court in our opposition to Tory attempts to water down our rights.

9. Try to develop an electoral pact with the Corbyn wing of the Labour Party, to increase the possibility of a truly socialist and progressive UK Government, to reverse the Thatcherism and austerity favoured by all successor governments since Thatcher, both Labour and Tory.

In this way we can renew and envigorate the Green Party by following this more radical agenda.

Here is the Evidence that the UK WILL be better off after BREXIT

Over the last few weeks we have heard a cacophony of vested interests telling us that it was not in THEIR best interests for the UK to leave the EU. From the US President and US treasury, the IMF, the Bank of England and George Osbourne's minions, there has been an orchestrated message of dire warnings about perceived threats to the personal wealth of every man, woman and child in the UK.

But all of these warnings have been predicated on one hypothesis: that if the UK leave the EU, the UK's trade will reduce. This is not a fact, it is a forecast, a prediction, basically a guess. And lo and behold, what is the outcome of this hypothetical scenario? Why we all get poorer.

A reasonable hypothesis you might think, but is it? It is based on us losing, as we are repeated told, an export market of 500 million people. That, of course, is a lie. Nearly 66 million of that 500 million are in the UK market, so we are actually talking about are exports to a market of 430 million people. What the hypothetical models do not take account of is the dynamic between the UK market of 66 million and the other 430 million in the EU.

So let us look at that dynamic: something the EU does not do, because it is only concerned with the whole market, not with the individual members, and least of all individual people like you and me. That is why the EU forces poverty and unemployment on vast swathes of the EU, from Greece to Portugal, young people in particular are suffering from this emphasis on the EU market as a whole, not the wealth of individual countries.

When we joined the EU, in the days of Ted Heath and Harold Wilson, the most important UK national statistic was the Balance of Payments. The difference between what we, the UK, as a nation export in goods and services and what we import. Indeed for many of the post war years, as we struggled to pay off the biggest debts of any nation after WW2 (any nation that actually paid its debts that is), we had import controls, because as a nation, we decided that we could not afford imports.

You rarely hear of the balance of payments these days. Yes, it was mentioned by the Bank of England as the Financial Policy Committee (29/3/16) dutifully trotted out its carefully worded support for REMAIN and the interests of international bankers. But only as a footnote: it merely said it had "concerns" about the UK's balance of payments deficit(1).

Yes, deficit. Because ever since we joined the Common Market, we have had a deficit with the rest of the EU. And as the EU has got bigger and bigger, so too has our deficit with the rest of the EU.

So here's the rub. Here is the evidence that yes, we would be better off if we LEAVE the EU.

In the last three years alone (2013-2015), according to the UK Office of National Statistics(2) , we have had a balance of payments deficit with the rest of the world of £267 billion. Within that, our trade deficit with the rest of the EU has been a staggering £303 billion. Yes, we actually had a modest SURPLUS of trade with the rest of the world outside the EU, of £36 billion.

And that deficit with the rest of the EU is going up, from £89 billion in 2013 to £107 billion in 2015. If we REMAIN, and the status quo does not change, then over the next ten years, based on these figures, we will have a net deficit with the rest of the EU of over ONE TRILLION POUNDS (£1,000 billion).

So, how will we pay for this trillion pound spending spree? Well, the Bank of England told us. As a nation, there are only two ways to pay for this massive trade deficit. Either by flogging off our capital, or, by increasing our debt. Well, our national assets have gone to pay for the profligacy of the past. Margaret Thatcher started it by selling off our North Sea Oil too cheaply, such that last year whilst Shell paid Norway over $4billion, the UK actually paid Shell $123 million in tax rebates(3). Since then the railways, water, utilities and many other public and private assets have been sold and are now owned by overseas, particularly EU interests. The profits from which are, no doubt, squirreled away in Luxembourg tax avoidance schemes set up under the now EU Commission president, Jean Claude Juncker, when he was president of Luxembourg (free the "LuxLeaks" whistle blowers now under arrest in Luxembourg!)

So, as the BoE pointed out, the only way to pay for the £trillion pound balance of payments deficit with the EU expected over the next ten years is by debt. A debt that is frankly, unsustainable.

Yes, if the UK remain in the EU, within ten years the UK will be bankrupt.

So, what is the Brexit alternative? Well one alternative is to stop importing this stuff we don't need and start making ourselves the stuff we do need. We could stop importing quite so much and invest in our own economy instead; in steel, manufacturing, the NHS, local farming etc.. We can say good riddance to all these trade deals like TTIP whose primary purpose is to allow multi-nationals free rein to satisfy their greed for a privatised NHS, schools and other public works.

Another alternative is to stop worshiping consumerism and embrace conservation. We have the opportunity to be world leaders in sensible technology like renewable energy and home insulation.

Investing in the UK will cost us far less than the Trillion pounds the UK will have to find in the next ten years to feed our addiction to EU imports. That is why the world's vested interests are united in spending so much time and money on persuading us that our addiction to EU imports must continue, no matter what the cost to the British people. That Trillion pounds goes into the coffers of those same vested interests and further increases the servitude of debt into which every UK citizen is daily encouraged to fall.

The reality is that, after BREXIT, we will continue to trade with the EU, but on our terms, not theirs. The EU will still want its Scotch and other UK products, but more importantly, the EU cannot afford to lose all of that Trillion Pound bonanza it is expecting over the next ten years. The EU will be falling over itself to strike a trade deal with the UK, because it cannot afford to lose its largest export market. We just need to have faith in ourselves, in our country and have the courage to say NO to membership of the EU and stand on our own feet again.

References:
(1) www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/news/2016/032.pdf point 11
(2)www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/bulletins/balanceofpayments/octtodecandannual2015 & previous periods
(3)http://www.standard.co.uk/business/nick-goodway-why-do-we-pay-shell-to-extract-our-oil-assets-a3228751.html

Jeremy Corbyn the Pessimist?

I have never known such a pessimistic Labour Party leader as Jeremy Corbyn. In his lack lustre speech about the reasons for his volte face over Brexit, he talked about the Tories as if they were destined to remain in power forever. He predicted that if we left the EU the Tories would immediately "dump rights on equal pay, working time, annual leave for agency workers, and on maternity pay". Even if we accept that the Tories could get away with such a change without the type of furore that we are seeing over their attack on disability benefits, surely he should be saying that if the Tories were so stupid as to attack the rights of working people, a future Labour Government would restore them and more. After all it was before the UK joined the EU that Barbara Castle championed equal pay!

That is the advantage of Brexit: a future left wing UK government can restore workers' rights and improve them. Compare and contrast EU law and TTIP. It is part of the EU Commission's president Jean-Claude Juncker's mission statement on trade to implement TTIP before 2019 (http://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019/malmstrom_en). It will be done. And what rights do we, the British (or any European) people, have to reject TTIP or a future UK Government to repeal it? Absolutely none: once signed TTIP will remain at the whim of the EU Commission.
It is this lack of democracy and accountability that it is at the heart of Brexit. A Vote to Leave the EU will restore the rights of the British people to make and repeal our own laws at will. A vote for Brexit is a vote for Freedom and that is why I will vote to Leave the EU on 23rd June.

Come the Revolution?

It is a while since I wrote on this blog. After the disappointing election result, where just 24% of the electorate, (or less than one in five of the population if you take account of those not allowed to vote), managed to vote in yet another Government of the minority under our patently undemocratic winner takes all voting system. Even in the Richmond constituency, where a parachuted in public school Tory was elected with a large majority of those who voted; the Tory still only has the support of just a third of the population.
But the Today programme on Radio 4 this morning, Tuesday 6th October 2015, really, really got my goat.
Reporting from the Tory party conference in Manchester, the BBC once again demonstrated its biased reporting. Time after time, the claims by the Tories to have created a strong economy went unchallenged. Not once, despite having the opportunity many times, notably whilst interviewing the nutty Minority Minister, David Cameroon, did any BBC reporter point out that since coming to power in 2010, the Tories have doubled the public sector debt (from c.£750 billion to £1.5 trillion and still rising): an increase greater than every Labour Government combined.
The balance of payments deficit (the difference between what the UK imports and what we export) was close to £100bn in 2014. That deficit was funded by the ever rising non-government debt: in other words we are all getting deeper in debt. That means that more and more of the UK's capital assets are having to be sold off to pay for that debt. Almost every major non-financial business in the UK is in foreign ownership. Many of these companies are dodging tax, because the Tories have still failed to implement meaningful anti-tax avoidance measurements.
The Tory chancellor, George Osborne was in China recently, kow-towing to the Communist dictatorship that runs that country, in order to get a few scraps from its table. Offering shameless bribes, such as offering more money to China for grass roots football, than the Tory Government spends on sport in North East England.
China produces more than 800 million tonnes of steel a year, over 50% of the world's production, on the back of massive Chinese Government support and low wages. In the UK, in one of the few remaining UK (but foreign owned) steel plants on Teesside; steel workers are being made redundant and receiving little support from the Tory Government.
The message is very clear, but completely over looked by the BBC. The Tories are rubbish at managing our economy and austerity just does not work. Pre-austerity post war Britain had higher levels of economic growth, which were more evenly distributed than today. Since Thatcher broke the post war consensus the UK has had lower growth than previously, as well as the three great post war economic crises: in the early 1980s, the early 1990s (Cameron was culpable in causing Black Monday) and the banking crisis after 2008.
What sense is there in reducing the top tax rate for millionaires down to 45% when you have massive public debt, when even under Thatcher it was 60%? Why hasn't this Government implemented sweeping changes to tax avoidance legislation to stop companies exporting their profits to tax havens? Why are the poor being penalised by reducing benefits and tax credits, whilst the rich get lower taxes? Why is this Government forcing Housing Associations to sell the dwindling stock of social housing, whilst paying massive subsidies to private landlords in the form of housing benefit?
These are the questions the BBC are not asking. The BBC and all the media should be challenging the Public school boys in charge, but instead they are run by them. Which is why the BBC virtually ignored the massive peaceful demonstrations against austerity outside the steel walls erected by the establishment around the ivory tower that is the Tory conference.
The BBC is part of the grand alliance of unaccountable power that rules this country and time is running out if we are to avoid a revolution being the only way to end this injustice.

BBC Continues Bias

BBC Look North from Newcastle continue to have debates from different constituencies that exclude Green Party candidates. In response to a complaint from me the BBC wrote:

We are filming "hot seats" for Look North in four of the region’s marginal constituencies and took the decision - based upon the BBC guidelines - to include UKIP candidates but not to include the Greens. This was based upon current levels of polling and past performance in recent elections. For example, UKIP won a North East seat in last year's European elections as well as coming second to Labour in both the Middlesbrough and South Shields by-elections."

On this basis, why do they include the Liberal Democrats? The Green Party got more votes and more seats than the Liberal Democrats in last year's European Elections, upon which they partially base their decision? The Green Party has more members than either the Liberal Democrats or UKIP and are standing in 90% of the seats in England & Wales.

In addition, their polling, for which no evidence was given and upon which they partially base their decision, will be affected by THEIR OWN DECISION NOT TO BROADCAST DETAILS OF GREEN CANDIDATES AND TO EXCLUDE GREEN CANDIDATES FROM BBC DEBATES!

What right do the BBC, a body paid for by you and me, have to decide who should be represented on their debates and who should be excluded? What price democracy, if the BBC can decide who is to be heard and who is not? In my constituency (Richmond (Yorks), there are two independents with strong followings, but under the BBC criteria they will never be heard. What right has a publicly owned broadcaster have to decide that?

The BBC should and will be challenged for their bias. This political bias is undermining democracy in this country and runs contrary to the BBC charter. Write to the BBC and complain! http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complain-online/

Leslie Rowe visit to Wensleydale School

As the Green Party’s general-election candidate for the Richmond constituency, I was impressed when I met pupils at Wensleydale School in Leyburn on Thursday 29th January 2015. A group of pupils from Years 7 to 11 questioned me on the Green party’s policies as part of the school’s ‘Lights, Camera, Parliament’ project. There were some excellent questions on dairy farming, electoral reform, the preponderence of public schoolboys in Parliament, nuclear power and my own personal campaigns. Notably, students were asking all candidates what they personally would do for the Richmond constituency, a question which I think William Hague, after twenty five years in the job, would find difficult to answer. After meeting the pupils, I commented: “They asked well-researched questions, followed up with supplementary questions and challenged my answers – just as voters should. The future of our democracy looks healthy in Wensleydale. I congratulate the school’s Headteacher, Graham Parker, and Charlie Barnett, the teacher who leads the project, on this innovative approach.” My visit to the school was just one event in my fact-finding tour of the constituency, which is chronicled on the Facebook page www.facebook.com/rcgreensyorks

A Quiet Revolution!

A happy New Year to all our readers! I hope that 2015 will be a good year for you all, a year of positive change! To help achieve this I am proud to have been selected by the Richmond Constituency Green Party as our Parliamentary candidate for 2015. I stood in 2005 and 2010, but this year sees a major change in the fortunes of the Richmond Green Party. Support for the Green Party has never been higher and in 2014 we doubled our membership. I believe that this takes us ahead of the Liberal Democrats. So what change is needed in 2015? I believe that what is needed for good and lasting change is nothing short of a revolution! A peaceful revolution, but a revolution all the same. If elected, Green MPs will call for a Constitutional conference as soon as possible after the election, to look at all aspects of democracy and public administration. For too long have we been governed by an elected dictatorship of public schoolboys, selected via a corrupt system ruled by money and privilege, where the wishes of local people are over-ruled by the vested interests that control all the old political parties. The Labour Party produced Tony Blair who took us into illegal wars and got rich from the aftermath of war. The Tory Party are ruled by a public school elite who ignore local talent and put up one millionaire after another as their candidate, none of whom can claim to have done one solid thing for the Richmond constituency. For instance, they claim to support the Friarage Hospital, but it is Tory legislation that is cutting NHS services and privatising the remainder. The Liberal Democrats just break their promises, like their written pledge to abolish tuition fees. The Green Party will campaign for a Constitutional Commission which will be required to draft a written constitution, oversee and arbitrate the process of decentralisation and take over the functions of the Boundary Commissions and the Electoral Commission. The Constitutional Commission would also be responsible for overseeing the appointment of an independent judiciary. The Commission must be accountable, representative, diverse, aware of practical requirements and grassroots concerns and be independent of Westminster. The Green Party will recommend to the Constitutional Commission that a gradual but complete decentralisation of powers be written into the Constitution; that the Constitution be based on agreed moral principles and that it fully guarantee political rights as well as wider human rights. North Yorkshire County Council is in the process of reducing services to a bare minimum, public transport and the library service being the latest victims of their cuts. In order for councils to be sufficiently legitimate and trustworthy to take on increased responsibility, large-scale electoral reform will be required, along with immediate legislation for citizens' rights. That electoral reform would guarantee that all citizens are represented in local and national government, not just the largest (or richest) minority. Parliament needs to be prepared to surrender many of its traditional powers, and actively assist in the process of decentralisation. To this end, Parliament has a number of key roles to play: first, to devolve functions to more local bodies; second, to lift its hold over councils and enable them to manage their own affairs and third, to work with the Constitutional Commission to meet demands from local Government to take on responsibility for resources and functions that are currently dealt with at too high a level by central Government and increasingly, the private sector. The Constitutional Commission will be responsible for keeping the boundaries and structures of local and regional government under review, taking account of the views of local authorities and residents. The aim should be to move towards structures that better reflect the ecology of the land and the character of local communities and that guarantee better democratic decision-making and the effective provision of public services. Any significant proposed changes to such structures would be subject to a referendum of all residents affected. The result of these policies will be to strip power from the political élite and give it back to local people. This is the revolution I want to see in 2015. If you are sick and tired of the corruption at the heart of Government, then please join the Green Party in calling for real change in 2015. Together we CAN BRING ABOUT A REAL REVOLUTION!

BBC Bias fails to mask undemocratic elections

Andrew Marr in his usual fawning style failed once again to challenge a blatant untruth spoken by the Tory chancellor George Osborne on Marr's BBC programme this morning (Sunday 6th May 2012). Osborne claimed that "more than half of the British people voted for Conservative or Liberal Democrat candidates in the local elections last Thursday." That is a blatant LIE.
From the BBC's own figures, 31% of votes cast were for the Tories and 16% for the LibDems. But then only 32% of the electorate voted. This means that actually only 15% (32% of 47%) of the electorate voted for the Coalition candidates, about one person in seven. But you also have to take account of all those people who are denied the vote. People under the age of 18 (who account for nearly a quarter of the population), prisoners, unregistered voters and people in long term institutions for instance. Taking this into account the ConDem vote accounts for less than one person in eight of the UK population.
The same hyperbole applies to Ed Milliband and his crowing Labour Party. Their share of the vote (38%) represents just 12% of voters. Taking into account the disenfranchised, less than one in ten of the UK population voted for New Labour in the local elections. This is hardly "winning back the voter's trust" as Ed Milliband declares.
Andrew Marr continues with the BBC Bias as he allows Osborne to talk about the "three political parties", as if no other political parties exist apart from the ConDems and Labour. Between them them parties garnered votes from less than a quarter of the population of Britain and yet they control more than 80% of local councils and dominate Westminster politics. This is in part due to the refusal of the BBC and other broadcasters to acknowledge that voters have the right to vote for whomsoever they choose and allow the ConDems and Labour to dominate political debate. At the last general election for instance, in my constituency (Richmond, North Yorkshire) the BBC made a prime time TV programme about the contest in Richmond and spoke to the Conservative, Lib Dem and Labour candidates, but did not even inform the one other candidate (from the Green Party) that the programme was being made. I should know. I was that Green candidate. My complaint to the BBC remains unanswered to this day.
It is not a democracy when the state broadcaster decides which politicians you can or cannot listen to. It is not a democracy when less than a quarter of the population decide who runs both national and local government.
So now it is time for you to do your bit. Are you fed up with all politicians, their corrupt ways and economy with the truth? Then do something about it. At your next election, do not vote Labour, Tory or Lib Dem. But rather than sit at home calling a pox on all their houses, go out and vote (if you can) for someone else. Be it Green, be it UKIP, English Democrat, SNP, Plaid Cymru or even a penguin, use your vote to help remove the corruption that is the British political establishment from our green and once pleasant land.

The Prince or the Pauper?

The fawning attitude of the BBC and other media moguls to the Royalist  wedding in London is part of a continuing conspiracy amongst the ruling classes to deny democracy in the UK. This has been backed by the closing down of Facebook accounts and Websites of anyone critical of the Monarchy and police raids on over 50 social centres.

This wedding is not a dream, but a nightmare. The tightening of the grip of the powers that be, at the expense of democracy. Westminster politicians, except for a brave few, are too frightened to speak the truth about the elite who run our country. If they are so confident that the monarchy is so popular, why has the alternative never been offered to the British people?

We need an informed debate and a referendum to ask ALL the people of Britain whether they would prefer an elected head of state, rather than this continuing dicatorship by an unelected elite. Do we really want to be governed by a Hooray Henry whose best friend is Posh Spice? Do you really think it is a coincidence that the leaders of the coalition government are all public schoolboys?
We know that a large proportion of the cheering crowds at the wedding were foreign tourists, especially Americans, who got rid of their monarch almost 250 years ago. There were no protests because protests were banned, protest leaders detained and the voice of protest gagged by a subservient media, led by the BBC. Like the majority of people in the UK, I did not watch the wedding, but spent the day delivering local election leaflets, campaigning for a Yes vote to electoral reform and dreaming of the day when Britain will indeed become a democracy. Not an elected dictatorship, led by an unelected monarch.
The Prince or the Pauper? Vote for the paupers of this world and set yourself free!