Success or Otherwise?

With the pulling out of British Forces in Afghanistan many questions will be ask about if the 13 years of conflict has been, as David Cameron claims, a "Success" or something else. What will be needed, if the campaign is to be looked at properly, is some kind of independent review body which comes up with a number of measure that can be used to evaluate the success of the conflict. This will give us an understand of the approach we took and if it was the right one. Of course the real measure of success will be one that the historians come up with in say a hundred years time, when most of the official documents will be available to them and not locked behind closed doors.

The back ground to the conflict stems from the 9/11 attack on the twin towers. US President George W Bush demanded the Taliban hand over any leaders of al-Qaeda and the Taliban did not immediately comply but called for talks, but President Bush said there would be "no negotiations" and he ordered US Forces to attacked the Taliban controlled country on October 7th 2001. The reason we went into Afghanistan was to support US forces as part of a US-led coalition which toppled the ruling Taliban, which we did. Then we remained there for the past 13 years with the final camp in Helmand province lowering the Union jack for the last time today.

Estimates of the cost of the war to the UK economy vary according to what site you read with estimates of £19bn from the BBC while other national papers suggest the cost is twice that amount, with even the MOD admitting £25bn had been spent in the first 12 years. No real figure will ever probably exist but even using the conservative figure of around £19bn that represents nearly £1.5bn per year since the war started and we joined forces with the US back in 2001 on some American pipe dream. That is enough save to have save the Air Fleet arm and RAF Harrier fleet, a couple of Aircraft Carriers and countless front line jobs, if we had cut our losses and withdrawn sooner or had never gone to war in the first place.

In the 13 years the British Forces lost some 453 troops, with the some 2,600 troops being wounded and requiring long term care. Further to this it is estimated that there will be in excess of 5,000 troops that suffer some kind of psychological injury and will require care. Given some 140,000 troops served over the 13 year period of the war the number of deaths and causalities seems relatively low compared to other conflicts, however given the nature of the war you could ask if going into the region to back the US was the right move back in 2001.

Some experts claim that Helmand is no more stable now than when thousands of British troops were deployed there in 2006. Opium production that fell under the Taliban, is increasing, fuelling corruption and the coffers of warlords. In fact if you look through the history of the region any military action in the region has never been successful and the country has gone back to being the way it was before the action took place. Of course it hoped that the installation of a democratic government will change the region, however this will soon become corrupt and some popular uprising will occur that topples it and replaces it with some kind totalitarian rule. It is also believed by many ordinary British soldiers that idea of that the Afghan armed forces can secure the province is little short of ridiculous.

In the short term others argue there has been an improvement in the country with girls going to school and increasing access to college education. Western values and ideals have been instilled in some of the population and there has been investment infrastructure projects, although some claim a lot has been spent on  development consultant fees rather than those Afghans who need it most. What the country will need is a strong government and leader, if it can find one has yet to be seen. At the moment it is likely that a new war will break out between the drug barons and the government and with arms supplied by the international arms companies in abundance it will be a bloody war. And of course the Taliban will still be there undefeated fighting in the hills and carrying out hit and run raids on the cities.

We were told this was a war to stop al-Qaeda after the attack of the twin towers in 2001 who US believed had planned that attack from Afghanistan, who it claims was operating freely under the Taliban regime. This was achieved and al-Qaeda was driven out of the country, but only to set up training camps elsewhere and we now have a new set or radical Islamic organisations threatening the world. The action over the last 13 years hasn't made the world a safer place, in fact it is more dangerous now and there is no reasons why al-Qaeda won't return to train in Afghanistan, again paid for by the drug barons who want to protect there crops.

The US lead action hasn't changed a thing, in fact military action is probably the wrong approach altogether and it would have been better use the intelligence services to identify and take out al-Qaeda rather than invading a country were nobody has ever won a war. In fact not a single al-Qaida operative or 'international terrorist' who could conceivably have threatened the United Kingdom is recorded as having been killed Helmand province.

So why were we there so long and will it all be worth it in 15 years time, are the questions I keep asking myself? I hope so, for I have a lot respect of the armed forces in the UK, but do question the leadership of those forces by our political leaders and if we made the right move in the first place. I feel that maybe we stayed to long and risked the lives of British forces. We also spent too much on a war that could never be won.

We aren't the military nation we were back in 2001 and the armed forces have decimated my Conservative spending cuts. In fact the Conservative government have done more damage to our military capability than the Taliban could ever have done.

Mother of all tax cuts

Little toff boy Georgie Osborn was having a bad day, the people fed up with cuts and the hardship of zero percent pay rises take to the streets demanding cuts to taxes to make sure they have the money to feed their families. Soon he though Prime Minister David posh boy Cameron would get cross with him and send to visit the chief whip for a right old public school boy thrashing!

Mindful that within the next twelve months there is going to be an election and realising that their polices haven't done all they promised the little toff boy Georgie Osborn listened to the people, well one person, Boris buffon Johnson.

Taking his advice, he came up with a cunning plan that would save the Government and get them a second term in office. Carefully, after writing his plan down, he put it in his red box and left number 11 and went off to announce his plan to his party.

The faithful were mainly grateful and his leader, David "posh boy" Cameron would have been interested if it wasn't for the lady in the little conservative blue number and long legs encased in sheer nylon stockings. 

His cunning plan was tax cut that would benefit millions of people throughout the land and bring a smile to their faces as the Sunday Newspapers hit the mat, well for those that can afford newspapers at least. 

When the people heard the news there were mass celebrations in cities and towns across the nation, for at last after years of suffering the people were going to be better off. Little tofff boy George Osborn was the hero of the nation.

Even the Prime Minister, David "posh boy" Cameron was quids in and a happy man who could smile at last after years of frowning and started telling the world how his party had given something back to its people. They knew they couldn't lose an election now.

And then he awoke from his dream, to find the world was still as grey as it had been the day before and when he looked into his red box all he found was that he had cut the price of a driving licence. What a silly little toff boy he had been thinking such a move could ever been seen a real tax cut that the people would welcome.  

Maybe the money they are giving back can hire an extra causality doctor or two.

Rutland Times improves local politics reporting

Having a look at the Rutland Times on-line this morning it was nice to see an improvement in their reporting of political events in the country. As I mentioned earlier in the month it look like politics was a dirty word in Rutland given what actually gets published in the local press.
 

So a big well done to the Rutland Times for taking local politics a bit more seriously than you have done of late. Just too things to do now and that is put more of the letters they receive on line and so investigative journalism would be good on what really going at Rutland County Council. Clearly with the council threatening to take three of it councillors to court and talk of police investigations over planning, something is going on one way or another.

Child poverty set to Rise

According to a report by the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission the chances of the of the Government of halving the number of children in child poverty by 2020 is at most remote without a radical changes are made to government polices. In fact "independent experts expect child poverty to increase significantly over the next few years" among the unemployed and low paid families as well as those struggling to by a houses. 

Figures indicate that 1.4 million children are now in "relative poverty" due to the effects of rising rents and mortgage costs since the Conservative government came to power in 2010. According to the report the United kingdom risks becoming a "permanently divided" society unless "radical new approaches" are taken by the next government, however as we know if the Conservatives get into power things will just get worse with a freeze in benefits which will hit any family, working or unemployed, on low income, forcing more children poverty.

Two measures of poverty are used in the United Kingdom. The first is relative poverty which is based whether a child's family income is less than 60% of median earnings, and the other is absolute poverty which is defined as the lack of sufficient resources with which to keep body and soul together. According to the figures in the report the number of children in absolute poverty has risen by 300,000 between 2010-11 and 2012-13. This in my opinion is disgraceful in one of the richest nations in the world.

David 'posh boy' Cameron's official spokesman "It is through greater employment opportunities for the households in which children grow up that we can best address this issue." To be honest I wonder if many Conservatives have really seen child poverty or tried have to live year on year wondering what they are going to eat at the end of the month when the money runs out with a week to go to payday or the benefits are due, because it not just employment opportunities that are need it, it is money.

I find it interesting that when issues like this come up, it is like the Prime Minister and his government seem to turn it into a issue of employment like it is just the unemployed that suffer. When the reality it is working people too. The fact is the Government already have one leaver they could apply to increase the wages of the low paid and that is the minimum wage in the United kingdom, but instead they plan to freeze benefits to those on low incomes working or not and give tax breaks to the rich.

The report proposes that the UK government give the Office for Budget Responsibility "a new role to report on the poverty and social mobility impacts of budgets", as well as advocating that "all political parties come forward with a clear set of plans before the election next year for what they will cut and how they will avoid negative impacts on social mobility and child poverty". Which to me seems a sound move in the right direction when we should be ridding our nation of this shame.

A number of charities have commented on the report.  Chief executive of the Children's Society, Matthew Reed, said that a failure to end child poverty by 2020 would be a "national disgrace" while Barnardo's Javed Khan said: "It's shocking that poverty looms for a record number of children by 2020, no matter how hard their families work. Surely now it's time for the UK Government to change its 'slash-and-burn' approach to welfare reform.". To be honest I agree and we need to do something now before it is too late for hundreds of thousands if not millions of Children in the United kingdom.

The Consertives v Public Sector

If you work in the public sector in the United kingdom rather than being seen as doing something worth while for society you are singled out by the Nasty Conservative party as some kind of plage that needs to be purged from this fine country. As we know teachers, social workers, nurses, doctors, dustmen, street cleaners, carers etc. working in the public sector with their Union agreed pay scales are made out to be some kind overpaid socialist disease. Over the years successive Conservative governments and Conservative run councils have either made cuts to public services or contracted out services to the private sector where the Unions have less hold, and re-employed the same staff for less money.

Since the Nasty Party came to power there has been a public pay freeze across the public sector that came to an end this year when Government announced that the workers in the sector would be allowed a token one percent rise. Hardly something that will really be noticeable give the cut in real terms of peoples wages.

People in the public sector now live in fear of losing there jobs, in the first three years of government the Nasty party have controlled, over 600,000 people have lost there jobs and their is speculation in 2013, that a further 400,000 people will lose their jobs before 2015. Public services have been cut to the bone and the pain is not over yet with predictions of another slow down coming our way and promises of tax cuts if the Conservatives get voted in for a second term at the next general election in May 2015, more jobs will have to go and more services lost.

It is not surprising that workers have been concerned about cuts in living standards due to years of pay freezes and cuts to pension schemes for a number of years, when you think that the rate of inflation between 2009 and 2014, and including this years pay rise, has resulted in these group of people having their spending power reduced by 15.23%. 

This means that someone earning £15,000 in 2009 would have expected with pay increases which are in line inflation to be earning £17,458 today, however the freeze and the one percent pay rise this year mean they are now earning just £15,150. That is effectively a reduction of £2,304 in the wages that they might have expected without the pay freeze. This sort of saving multiplied across the whole of the public sector has saved the government billions and billions of pounds.

Earlier in the week nurses and midwives staged their first strike in over thirty years by nurses and the first ever by midwives since they formed a professional body in 1881.Such is the level of feeling that they have been treated badly by the current Conservative Government. They took this action because Nasty Party rejected an across-the-board one percent pay increase that was recommended by an independent pay review body, which was made worse by the fact that the Members of Parliament have been awarded a pay rise of some 10% by their professional body. This the MP's have accepted, plus an additional one percent they are due in April. It seems there is one rule for some public servants while the mainstream public workers have to suffer.

Today thousands of people march for better wages as unions demonstrate across Britain under the slogan "Britain needs a pay rise" to bring awareness to the drop in living that many in the public sector have had to deal with over recent years, together with those in the failing industries and retail in the private sector.  He is the story of one of them that was on the BBC news website today:

Mick Bowman a 56 year old mental health social worker told his story, he hasn't had a pay rise for four years, so with the cost of living rising that's a very substantial pay cut. Over those four years his workload has increased and his job has become more stressful as a result. To get by he relies at the end of every month on his credit card to by food and hasn't had a holiday in three years. Like many on the match he is angry and believes it is time to invest more in the public sector to get people in to a position where they spend more and pay more taxes to the government.

As we run up to the election this is going to be a battle that goes on and on between the uncaring Nasty Party, who have cut services to the old, the disabled and the vulnerable, and the Trade Unions will go on and on. 

It about time this government told the truth and dropped the lie about about being the compassionate Conservatives, for there nothing compassionate about the fact they are going to now start freezing benefits affecting millions of working people in the UK if they are return to office after the elections in may next year. They care about one thing power and money and their friends in high places.

Rutland County Council Election Results

Today the results of the two Rutland County Council by-elections where announced for the wards of South West Oakham and Whissendine. These were called after sad death of the Independent councillor Brian Montgomery for the ward of Whissendine and mysterious resignation without reason by Conservative Joanna Figgs for the ward South West Oakham.

The elections took place yesterday and as usual for local elections in Rutland the turnout was low, as you would expect in Rutland, with only 24.82% of the electorate voting in South West Oakham and a slightly better turnout of 34.67% of the electorate voting in Whissendine. The results of the polls are as follows:

Results for the ward of South West Oakham 

Names of Candidates......................................	Votes recorded
Benjanin Callaghan - Independent	177
Richard Clifton - Conservative Party	240
Richard Swift - Liberal Democrat Party	43
Rejected Ballot Papers	1

Results for the ward of Whissendine

Names of Candidates......................................	Votes recorded
Samuel Asplin - Liberal Democrat Party	192
Jonathan Baker - Conservative Party	179
Rejected Ballot Papers	0

Richard Clifton retained the ward of South West Oakham for the Conservative Party while Samuel Asplin took the ward of Whissendine from Independents for the Liberal Democrat Party. This wouldn't have effected the balance of power in Rutland County Council except for the resignation of Chris Parsons from the Conservative Party who is going to carry on representing his ward for Ryhall and Casterton as an Independent. The change in make up in the council from the 2011 election to today after the by election are as follows:

	May 2011	Oct 2014	change
Conservative Party	16	15	-1
Independents	8	6	-2
Labour Party	0	0	0
Liberal Democrat Party	2	2	0
UK Independence Party..	0	3	+3

Currently the Conservative Party have an overall majority of four on Rutland County Council, if they all turn up to vote, as recently there have been a number of Conservative Councillors off sick. 

It is sad to see such a small turn out at the polls in Rutland yet again, especially after seeing the people so motivated over the Aldi application. Through lack of political debate in the press, lack of choice with no Labour party candidates bothering to come forward  to stand in the wards and the main parties falling to talk about local issues that effect people of the wards it seems that interest in party politics is dead. What has replaced it is issue politics where people are motivated by single issues that effect their lives, hence all the interest in Aldi's planning application. Maybe it is time for a new approach to local politics in the United Kingdom.

Lord Nasty Freud of the Nasty Party

Lord Nasty Freud recently suggested that people with mental disabilities could be paid as little as £2 an hour at the Conservative party conference in Birmingham last month. That amounts to £4.50 less than the minimum wage of £6.50. Working on that level of pay a person would have an equivalent salary of £3900 per year for a 37.5 hour working week, which equates to a weekly wage of £75.

Lord Nasty Freud of the Nasty Party was, if you remember, the architect of the Bedroom Tax that has meant that many poor people, both unemployed and working, who unable to downsize to a smaller house and who have a spare bedroom are effectively being taxed to the tune of £15 per week. This tax has also affected the disabled and those with serious illnesses who need an extra room for medical equipment or whose houses have been especially adapted to their needs which just happen to have an extra bedroom.

Lord Nasty Freud is in charge of benefit reform for the David Cameron's Nasty party and comments like this need to be taken seriously, given his track record on the Bedroom tax and the Conservatives plans to cut benefits and introduce tax cuts for the rich. Clearly this was something he was or has thought about. You got go around even in a fringe meeting at a political conference saying such things and getting away from it.

Lord Nasty Freud has always taken a dim view of the disabled and those Out of work. His vision of welfare reform would see the removal of welfare benefits paid purely on the basis of need and the introduction of measures force people with disablities to enter employment or be subject to sanctions resulting in loss of benefits

His reforms to the Work Capability Assessments, which were introduced in 2013, for disabled welfare claimants were described by Professor Peter Beresford OBE, at Brunel University, as "reminiscent of the medical tribunals that returned shell shocked and badly wounded soldiers to duty in the first world war or the 'KV-machine', the medical commission the Nazis used in the second world war to reclassify wounded soilders as fit for the Eastern front'".

I guess it won't come as too much of a shock to know that Lord Nasty Freud was once an Investment Banker. While in the city he was, as Alexander Preston of the Spectator put it, a "key players in several of the most embarrassing and badly managed deals in investment banking history. So I guess it was only natural for him to join the Conservative party, be given a peerage a few months later and then become shadow minister for welfare in the House of Lords, and then being given the same job in government when the Conservatives came to power.

Today's revelation about what he said about the disabled surfaced at Prime Minsters questions time when it was raised as a question by labour leader Ed Miliband. The Prime Minster, David Cameron replied by saying of Lord Nasty Freud's remarks “Those are not the views of the government, they are not the views of anyone in the government. The minimum wage is paid to everybody, disabled people included.”. Later Ed Miliband retorted “In the dog days of this government the Conservative party is going back to its worst instincts – unfunded tax cuts, hitting the poorest hardest, now undermining the minimum wage. The nasty party is back.”

Shortly after Lord Nasty Freud was forced to issue an apology about the remarks he made and adding  “I was foolish to accept the premise of the question. To be clear, all disabled people should be paid at least the minimum wage, without exception, and I accept it is offensive to suggest anything else." But of course we all know what he is thinking now and no apology is ever going to change that fact.

Aldi Plans for Oakham get Approval

So many people turned up at today's planning meeting at Rutland County Council that it had to be moved to the Towns museum. It was there that between 200 and 250 members of the public watched proceedings as the Development Control and Licensing Committee debated and finally approved planning permission for a new Aldi store to be built off the Oakham ring road near to the new BP petrol station. 

Even since Adli came to show the plans to the people of Oakham last year there has been massive support for the project, however the project seemed set to be doomed when Andrew Waskett-Burt, Planning Officer of Rutland County Council, recommended that Rutland County Council reject the plans based on the fact the land had already be designated as employment land rather than land for retail developments.

What happened next seemed remarkable for a small county town where politics seems almost a dirty word, where the public are use to Rutland County Council what they please without much regard for public opinion. The people of the county started to get organised and were highly vocal about the issue in both the local press and on-line. By Tuesday morning over 1000 people had signed one of two online petitions supporting the opening of the store, while others had posted messages on support on the Rutland County Council planing web site and there was even a Facebook page supporting the store with over 100 people saying they were coming to tonight's meeting.

Given the report Planning Officer of Rutland County Council it really did look like the whole project was doomed. The report was so negative about the proposal and seemed to dismiss the hundreds of letters and emails of support that had been sent to the council. Next came the the fear that the adoption of the Sites Allocations Development Plan the night before, at the disrupted full council meeting, could have seen the whole thing rejected even before it was discussed. It looked at one point it was dead in the water.

Thankfully that did not happen and the people of Rutland and their mass support for the store coming to the town was too great not to be taken into consideration. Development Control and Licensing Committee had little choice but to approve the plans. Which was probably a good thing with so many people in the museum to see the outcome of the vote. 

I can imagine if they had turned it down their would have been a lot unhappy and just meters away from the council members and their bouncers. Then there would have been the public backlash from rejection of the plans from the majority of the towns people and the people in the nearby villages who come polling day next year at the local elections would have remember the events of the night and voted the council out office for sure.

The vote on the night saw 10 of the 11 councillors on Development Control and Licensing Committee voting for the plan to build the store, while the remaining one abstained. This ends a ten year battle for Aldi who have been trying to get a store in to the town.

Soon we will have quality discount food store in the town to compete with the existing two supermarkets and the proposed supermarket on the site of the old college. This will be especially good news to those on low incomes in the town who find the existing supermarkets a great strain on their finances. Having shopped in Aldi in Grantham at times they are in for somewhat of a treat, their cooked meats are excellent, as are their premium sausages and their clone of fruit corner yogurt are to die for. Well done to everyone that supported the store coming to Oakham. We won and Rutland County Council listened for once.

---

Update 15th October - You can read a account of the meeting by Martin Brookes on his blog: Martin Brookes Oakham Rutland 
Update 15th October - You can read the Rutland Times account of the meeting on their website: Rutland Times

Police investigate Rutland County Council

The voting on the Site Allocations and Policies Development Plan document was disrupted when a number of councillors walked out the full meeting of Rutland Country Council after allegations of planning fraud according to Martine Brookes who posted after the meeting on his blog, where you can read a more detailed account.

It appears that two UKIP Councillors have reported Rutland Council to the Police over the agreements and sales made between the Rutland County Council, Bellway Homes and Tresham College. Currently the Police are investigating the allegations which the Rutland County Council strongly deny claiming they have been fabricated by the UKIP Councillors.

UK Independence Party Targetting Everyone

UKIP leader Nigel Farage has said his party is "targeting everybody" well it seems that someone in the party is trying hardER than anyone else to include "everyone" in his campaigning and that is Roger Helmer. He has been going places that normal MP'S would dare be seen to go to get votes.

It seems according to The Sun and a number of other newspapers, Roger Helmer was photographed visiting the Victoria House massage parlour in Lutterworth, on Friday. Clearly after the win for UKIP in Clacton-on-Sea he decided to see if he could harden support for the party.

Victoria House has by it's own account been driving men wild since 1999, and that is confirmed by some of the reviews on the web. Now I can't include all the details, far to raunchy, but one starts "XXX is sex on legs. Great slim figure with nicely sized responsive breasts. From the way she looks at you and touches during the massage you know is going to be special" and goes on to describe a complete service with an explosive ending.

According to Roger Helmer he works "extremely hard and when I do occasionally have time off I enjoy a massage." and “I hope my constituents will agree people are entitled to enjoy their leisure as they please.”

Speaking to the Leicester Mercury, where you can read the full story, he said “What I do in my own time is of no concern to anyone but myself, especially not The Sun." Before saying “I’ve always said people are welcome to ask me anything about my political life and political views, but my private life should be my own and is of no concern to anyone but me." 

The question is the UK Independence Party are going to do about his odd canvassing methods? After all other MP's have been removed from office for less and then stood down as MP at the first opportunity.

UK Independence Party Polices

Although I have been aware of the UK Independence Parties stand on Europe ever since their formation back in 1993 they until recently been a one policy party. Recently, however they have been branching out to fill their political portfolio with polices to attract the voters they will need to win a election, the first step of which they took at last Thursdays  by-election in Clacton on sea. I thought it be worth looking at what they believe in.

Now I won't comment on there the polices of the parties at this stage other than say not down all the references to being British. There will be plenty of time to comment on these polices as we approach the general election.So here is what they are saying:

Membership of the European Union - It is well known that UKIP wants to leave the European Union completely and not seek to remain in the European Free Trade Area. They believe leaving the EU will protect jobs and increase prosperity in the UK. The also plan to review the legislation and regulations they feel have come from the EU and repel those that they feel stop Britain being prosperous. Instead they plan to take up Britain's seat at the World Trade Organisation.

Repairing the UK Economy - UKIP plans to repairing the economy includes increasing the personal allowance, reduce the higher rate of income tax, abolishing inheritance tax. Thus lowing the tax take of the government. This will be paid for by restructuring business taxes, reducing infrastructure spending, leaving the EU, cutting foreign aid and the scraping of the Department of Energy and Climate change and the Department of Culture and Media.

Prioritising Education and Skills - As far as education goes they are going to standardise GCSE's , A-levels and introduce an Apprenticeship qualification which can taken at GCSE Level and reintroduce Grammar schools that select on the basis of ability. They would then reduce the intake of the Universities while encouraging degrees in maths as long as the graduate lives and pays tax in Britain for five years. Finally all free schools would have to uphold British values.

Honouring the Military Covenant - UKIP plan to fully resource the military assets and personal and guarantee that those who have served in the armed forces for 12 years will get a job in the police, prison service or boarder force. They plan the setting up a Veterans Department get the after-service care including access to mental health services and priority social housing.

The National Health Service - They are promising a free NHS at point of delivery and that that GP's will be open one evening a week. In addition to this they will make local authorities to buy existing PFI arrangements and stop any further PFI agreements in the NHS. Finally the will oppose the sale of the health service to third parties, but they talked about cuts to the health service and favouring reduction of administration and management posts in the health service. Non-British people using the health service will have to pay the full cost of their treatement.

Controlling Boarders - UKIP will issue work permits to non-British workers who have specific skills that the country requires, they must speak English, have a job to go to and accommodation. Those without enough points under the UKIPs point system won't receive work permits and will effectively have to leave the country if they are already in residence in Britain for less than ten years. Anyone non-British national won't be eligible for benefits or access to the National Health Service until they have paid taxes in Britain for 5 years.

Foreign Aid - UKIP will make substantial cuts to the Foreign Aid budget and the remaining budget will be healthcare initiatives, inoculations against preventable diseases and clean water programmes provided by contracts with British companies.

Energy - UKIP will repeal the Climate Change Act, abolish subsidies to wind farms and solar arrays and encourage the extraction of shale gas. They also plan to scrap the Large Scale Combustion Directive which was introduced to reduce sulphur dioxide and other pollutants that adversely effect air quality. In addition to this they will scrap Department of Energy and Climate change.

Agriculture and Fishing - They will introduce a farm payment to replace the EU subsidies paid to farmers and they will reinstate British territorial waters and require non-British fishing vessels to purchase fishing permits.

Welfare and Childcare - UK wants to simplify the welfare system, support the benefit cap and pay child benefit only on the first two children.

Transport - UKIP will scrap the HS2 scheme, oppose tolls on public roads, keep pensioners bus passes and regulate the use of speed cameras. All non-British road users will have to buy a Britdisc to drive on British roads.

Housing and planning - UKIP will protect the green belt and encourage brownfield development and offer subsidies to clean up brownfield sites. Communities will be able to overturn large developments and hold local referendums if protest groups get the signatures of 5% or the local electors.

Democracy and the Constitution - UKIP will ensure that English MP's are the only ones that can vote on English issues and give powers to initiate national referendums on issues of public interest.

Law and Order - UKIP will opt out of all laws and agreements on human rights and all the arrangements about pan European crime and extradition that were made when we were members of the EU. They will replace them with new agreements and British Bill of Rights. In terms of sentencing anyone convicted of a crime will be expected to serve the full sentence of the court with parole only being given for good behaviour.

Culture - UKIP will scrap the Department of Culture and Media, while unifying British culture to any one that any one that identifies with British values. All official documents will published in English and Welsh and Scots Gaelic where appropriate and laws will be rigorously enforced on cultural practices that are un-British. Finally smoking ban will be lift in pubs and clubs with the introdution of smoking rooms.

Employment and Small Business - Firms will be encourage to employ British workers by discriminating against non-British workers and allow agency workers to work for lower pay than those doing the same job in the same company but on the company payroll.

So that is what they say in public on there website, but what they think in private like many other nationalist political parties is another thing, but some of that is already coming out, you just have look at some of the leadership to see that. It certainly has the man in the pub appeal but that is where it was probably thought out over pint and the odd trip to the smoking shelter and the loo. You can see why the are doing well most people born in the UK will find at least one thing they agree with.

Aldi Plans to be Torpedoed Tomorrow

I was reading a post on Martins Brookes blog that mentioned that if the “Sites Allocations Development Plan” is approved tomorrow then members that approve the plan won't be able to vote on Tuesday for the acceptance of the plan. I'm not as knowledgeable as Mr Brookes on council procedures but there is reason not to think that he isn't correct from what I understand of such matters. Nor is there any reason to think that the “Sites Allocation Development Plan” will not be pushed through on tomorrow by the Conservatives. Those Conservatives on the controlled Development Control and Licensing Committee will no doubt vote for the “Sites Allocations Development Plan” and then Aldi plans will be torpedoed before we even get to Tuesday.

Having looked at the document prepared by Andrew Waskett-Burt Planning Officer of Rutland County Council that will go before the Development Control and Licensing Committee really does a good job of destroying the planning proposal in it recommendation for rejection by the committee. The Planning Officer maintains, throughout his report, that land that has been allocated to employment and that should remain allocated employment and recommends a high level marking campaign to attract development. However the site has been marketed pro-actively for the last 9 years though a number of marketing initiatives including mail shots, internet marketing and the production of e-brochures. Ever since it was allocated as employment land in 2001 it has failed to attract interest. Apparently according to the report the Oakham Enterprise Park can not be used to argue that additional development land now exists in the region which would allow the reallocation of the proposed site to other uses.

The report from the Planning Officer fails really to take seriously the views of local people and does it best to dismiss them. Those that have resounded positively to the application have commented on the following benefits to the town:

• Public demand and support for an Aldi store in Oakam.
• Job creation, especially for young people.
• Reduction in those travelling out of the area to access discount food stores in Corby and Grantham which would result in benefits to the local economy and the environment.
• Increased choice, range and competition to the existing two supermarkets and the planned supermarket Oakham, by offering a affordable alternative for food shopping for families on low incomes.
• The proposed plan is big enough to benefit town, but small enough to not adversely affect other shops on the High Street and that it is preferable to Sainsbury’s in its planned location
• Since the Council have purchased Ashwell Prison for employment use this the land the store will be built on can be freed up for other uses.
• The town is expanding and will need more supermarkets to cope with the increased population.
• Will free up traffic at the crossing on Melton Road due its location off the ring road.

All these have been considered and mostly rejected. It seems that the for addition provision for another supermarket in the town will largely be satisfied by the previously approved Sainsbury’s store on Barleythorpe Road. This is despite people wanting a store in the town that provide discounted quality food that people on low incomes can afford.

All the ways you look at it the plan looks like it will be rejected on Tuesday and all we can do is try and make ourselves heard and show our support and hope for the best and that reason takes over from stupidity at the Council. Two documents that might interest you are the report prepared by Andrew Waskett-Burt Planning Officer, Planning Rejection Recommendation, and the response by the developers, Response to the Rejection Recommendation. If you want to e-mail the councillors on the Development Control and Licensing Committee there details are as follows:

Mr M E Baines democratic@rutland.gov.uk
Mrs C L Vernon cvernon@rutland.gov.uk
Mr D C Hollis dhollis@rutland.gov.uk
Mr T C King tking@rutland.gov.uk
Mrs C J Cartwright cjcartwright@rutland.gov.uk
Mr J Lammie jlammie@rutland.gov.uk
Mr W J Cross wcross@rutland.gov.uk
Mr M A Oxley moxley@rutland.gov.uk
Mr J T Dale jdale@rutland.gov.uk
Mr C A Parsons cparsons@rutland.gov.uk
Mr R J Gale rgale@rutland.gov.uk
Mr M R Woodcock mwoodcock@rutland.gov.uk

One thing, I think, is for sure if the plan is rejected on Tuesday or torpedoed on tomorrow there are going to be a lot of angry people that feel they haven't been listened too by the Rutland County Council, but then again when have the Council ever listened to the people they are meant to represent in Rutland? May be it is time for a change.

The Nasty Right

There was a rather disturbing fact on the BBC website about an organisation called "Britain First Party" who have over 480,000 likes for their Facebook page. To put that in context that is more than Prime Minster who has around 350,000 likes for his own page and The UK Independence Party which has 260,000 likes. That is an amazing amount of Facebook likes for an organisation that many of use won't have heard much about in the press.

The organisation is fronted by Paul Goulding who has been at the forefront of its leading confrontational street activities and has been accused of ‘invading’ mosques. Goulding was once in the far-right "British National Front" and was their publicity officer. The "Britain First Party" was started to fill the vacuum on the far right of British politics as the "British National Front" imploded and lost support over recent years. The party sets out to combining the immigrant-bashing rhetoric of the "British National Front" with the intolerant hostility to Islam.

Some believe that man behind the scenes running the organisation is Jim Dowson, another former "British National Front" member who was once in charge of fundraising. Dowson has been  has been a religious antagonist and Protestant extremist since the early 1980s, when he was active in anti-abortion extremism in Scotland and once led an anti-abortion group named UK Life League, that was investigated by the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit.

Matthew Collins, director of research for "HOPE Not Hate" and a former member of the National Front  and British National Front said that the Britain First’s “confrontational style is attracting huge publicity and could potentially lead to a violent backlash. If nothing else, its provocative actions, such as distributing Bibles inside mosques and doorstepping Muslim community leaders in their homes and is generating a climate of fear.”

"Britain First Party" rise and success is due to its use of social media such as Facebook to get it's message across. It strategically marketing itself to people with campaigns which have shown support for the Armed Forces or against animal cruelty that people ‘Like’ and ‘Share’ (knowingly and unwillingly), which makes the post reach out to more people and so spreading the message and doctrine of the organisation. They also make good use of Facebook to organise protests and far right political rallys. Paul Goulding sees social media as the future of Politics and uses it well.

The "Britain First Party" are an anti-imagination group that describe themselves as a patriotic group and street defence organisation.  In the video on the BBC News website they seen at a protest in Rotherham protesting after the report of that up to 1400 girls were abused by mainly by Asian men. Tensions in the video are clearly high and there is a high police presence.  As the Britain First Party" went on a counter demonstration started, shops closed and the police had to step in to separate the two groups. It is only matter of time before violence breaks out, something some of the organisations 60,000 official members would  more than approve of against the non-British community in the United Kingdom. 

This is an organisation that used the name of murdered Fusilier Lee Rigby, who was killed by extremists, in there campaigns, even after his family made a public plea for his name not to be taken in vain for political purposes. It was reported that Lee’s mum said she was ‘heartbroken’ that her son’s name was allowed to be used by the party, saying Britain Firsts views were ‘not what lee believed in and has no support from the family’. This shows what little respect they have for the dead and how they are willing to make capital of anything that will get them support.

It wasn't the first time they used this tactic, back  2012,  "Britain First Party" used the images of two murdered young men and claimed they were white victims of racial murders as part of a flyer whose headline was ‘RIP the white British victims of racism... will YOU help honour their memory?’. The flyer was signed by Paul Goulding and read: "These poor souls – all of them members of our own nation and our own flesh and blood – have been deprived of life by violent immigrant racists in horrific and brutal attacks." The truth was that evidence came forth proving the murders were racially motivated, the parents of the victims were horrified at the use of the pictures of the young men.

Although membership of this group is still relatively small at the moment but their reach is growing through the use of social media. The message is being spread more effectively than that of the main political parties that many feel disfranchised by. Many are looking for away of punishing these parties, some turning to the right wing "UK Independence Party" which has parallels with the views of the "Britain First Party" in terms of immigration, it is just that latter goes further and blame the problems in Britain on those of non-white origin.

One has to remember back to Germany at the time of the economic troubles the county faced back in the 1930's and how it led to the rise of the "National Socialist German Workers' Party", better known as the "Nazi Party". They used same sort of techniques that were available to them  at the time to create a populist movement that took them from a unknown organisation on the sidelines of German politics to one that had complete power over the German people and whose ambitions based on race purity led to the second world war. The "Nazi Party" focused on the Jews while the "Britain First Party" has focused on the Muslims, the way they work is the same and it is something we all need to be aware of.

The saddest thing is that a high proportion of  "Britain First Party" would love the analogy I have made to them and the "Nazi Party" because they share the same goals and they are just as misguided as those that originally joined the "Nazi Party". The rest of us know better, but for how long before their drip feeding of their message sinks in and takes us over.

This is a free society and many of use value our right freedom of speech, expression, association and religion, and for that reason you can't silence this group without damaging those rights, but you can say and show what they represent. That is what I'm trying to do here and I hope like me you feel repulsed by their doctrine and you challenge anyone that has those views. We have just one world and we all have to live in it. This organisation shares more with movements like the Islamic State than it does with the values of freedom we all hold so dear.

Not to late to have your say - Aldi Oakhm

Local people are continuing to campaign for Rutland County Council to support the planning application that would see a Aldi store being built on wasteland, that has been allocated for employment land but left derelict for years and it is not too late to have you say and make your voice heard.

Simply by going on to the Rutland County Council website and filling in a simple on line form you can show your support for the plan. By clicking on this link, RCC Planning Online, you will be taken to the page shown above. On the page you just have to fill in the boxes with you name and address and some other details. The important bit is at the bottom where a drop down menu lets you add your support for the application and the box below that were you need to state your reasons for supporting the development.

According to the article that appeared today on the Rutland Times website, there was when they looked some "460 letters in support of Aldi and three objections" for the planned store. This represents some 99.4% of the comments being in favour of the store being built on the site near to lands End and the new petrol station. However it does just stop there as there is another way you can show your support.

On the change.org site Hayley Rose has set up a online petition to support the planning application, which you can get to by clicking on this link, Petition to Approve Aldi Supermarket plans in Oakham. All you have to do this time is time is enter your details in the box on the right of the screen and then click the sign box and you are almost done as you might get a confirmation email which you just have to quickly look at and follow a link to make sure your a human being.

Please help out if you want a Aldi in Oakham, tell your friends on Twitter and Facebook and get those that are local to the town to do the same. Get them to go on the Rutland Council Website and sign the petition and make as much noise as they can on social media. Make sure people know that they could lose a valuable asset that will make Oakham a more affordable place to shop. Hayley is trying to get a thousand people to sign the petition and I sure we get those and a few more.

UKIP gets first Westminster MP

With two by-elections for seats in the Westminster Parliament last night it was a chance see how well UK Independence Party would do against both major parties. Both the Conservatives and Labour were both trying to keep seats against the rise of the nationalist UK Independence Party. The Conservatives lost the seat they once they held and the Labour majority was decimated. Along the way UKIP won there first MP in the Westminster parliament.

Both got the shock of their lives, but listening to the rhetoric of both major party they haven't learnt a thing and the rise of the nationalist will continue. So safe do they feel that they think they have all the answers but they are not connecting with the people and they haven't been listening for years, and people are fed up with the lot of them.

You just had to listen to the Conservative that the BBC found for the by-election special to realise why they lost the seat in Clacton on sea who avoided answering questions by just going on about the economy and how well they have done since they have been in power. He wasn't willing to have a debate with the presenter, he just wanted to force his message across and avoid the issues that saw Douglas Carswell win the first ever seat in the Westminster Parliament. He was a pathetic waste of space and I don't know why the BBC gave him air time.

  
Last night not only did UK Independence Party in Clacton on sea, an area you would expect them to do well, but they almost won a second seat Heywood and Middleton, in the North West of England. It was so close that they even had to have a recount to check if Labour had won the seat or not. UK Independence Party political appeal crosses party lines and as we get closer to the election we will see more and more polices announced that have equally a strong pull on the electorate.

The reason why the UK Independence Party are doing so well is that can be bothered to listen and act on what they are hearing rather than dismissing it as the major parties do in the UK. They then base their polices around public opinion to attach the maximum number votes across all sections of society. They set out to give the people what they want in exchange for power and they are doing it so well that they will be a threat in every seat come the next election.

The Conservative party keep going on about a vote for the UK Independence Party being a vote for labour when in fact it is what it says, just a vote for the UK Independence Party. They hope this will stop the Conservative voters that want to get out of Europe to vote for them in fear of voting a Labour Government in at the next election, but it will all back fired on them if they are not careful. The negative campaigning and the the campaigning of fear is something that almost backfired during the Scottish referendum and it wasn't until the YES campaign, and in particular Gordon Brown, started talking about the positives that fortunes of the YES campaign began to turn round. They have to remember that the majority people in the UK didn't vote for them in the first place.

By refusing to talking talk about the issues that the UK Independence Party are using to attract voters then they deserve what they get in the general election in 2015. It just arrogance to think that people will vote for them and stick your head in the sand like Ed Miliband when he refused to answer questions form the press. Of course a lot of right wing Conservative Members of Parliament that sympathise with UK Independence Party will be blaming Europe for last nights election results, but this shift in voting is more than about the problems with Politics in the UK, they don't see that they are the problem and their attitude to the greater population in the UK.

Last night every main party in the UK politics had a wake up call. All of them got a political kicking from the UK Independence Party, with the collapse of the Conservative and LibDem vote and reduction of the majority in a safe Labour seat. The question is will they press the snooze button hope that the problem goes away. Listening to the World at One on Radio 4, that what they seem to be doing and they plan to continue doing.  

The next round in this fight will be in Rochester and Strood where the reckless Conservative MP, Mark Reckless, will be standing against his old party after defecting to the UK Independence Party during the party conference season. If everything goes the way it seems to be going at the moment soon their will be two members of parliament in Westminster for the UK Independence Party, which the Conservative David Cameron said was full of "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists". We it is wake up time and I hope they hear the alarm going off for all our sakes.