THE NEED FOR AN ENGLISH PARLIAMENT
The subversion of the British constitution, culminating in the recent rigged general election, has been the aim of the Labour project since before Tony Blair took office in 1997. What is so surprising is the Tories complicity in that subversion when it was to their own manifest disadvantage.
But in many ways, this is merely the chickens coming home to roast. The problem with the Conservative Party is not recent. It has existed since the Second World War, if not before.
The Tories have never really opposed socialism. They have never really been willing to present the moral and technical arguments against socialism. Instead, they have preferred to present their own watered-down version of it.
For very many years, the Tories implemented wage controls, price controls, printed money, had beer and sandwiches with union barons, and tried to run nationalised industries just as Labour would do. Only they believed that they could do it better.
In the 1970s, as Heath blundered into his own bout of high spending, money-printing socialism, the ratchet principle was identified. Every time Labour took office they would move the country closer to a full socialist state. Yet when the Tories took office, they were never willing to reverse that trend. Instead the country merely had a breathing space before Labour took office again and the shift towards a socialist state continued.
Whenever Labour took office, the Tories always knew that Labour’s commitment to nationalisation and Clause 4 of its constitution would inexorably lead to economic catastrophe. At which point, inflation rocketed, the IMF would be called in, or major cuts in government spending would be implemented - often accompanied with widespread strikes and work to rules etc.
Inevitably, Labour would then lose the following general election and the Tories would take power once again. All the Tories had to do was sit back and await the inevitable economic disaster.
But then there was a change. With the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the communist satellite states across eastern Europe, culminating with the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union itself, and the cumulative effect of successive election defeats by Labour, Labour ditched Clause 4, abandoned the economic aspects of socialism such as nationalisation, and repackaged itself as New Labour. A combination of a tolerance of capitalism with a concentration on political correctness in all its neo-communist glory.
New Labour was the product of a major realignment on the left of British politics, which involved the launch and collapse of the SDP, the purge of Militant Tendency within Labour, and the collapse of the Communist Party. This also affected the centre of British politics with the merger of the SDP with the Liberal Party.
On the right of British politics, there had been the emergence of the so-called New Right in the 1970s, which evolved into Thatcherism. This was basically economic liberalism (free markets, free trade etc), with a particular emphasis on monetarism. Monetarism was the answer to Keynesianism and the solution to inflation. All of this was hotly debated at the time and it is easy to forget the impact that monetarism had, the extent of the intellectual differences, and the scale of the fierce political debate which eventually propelled Margaret Thatcher into office.
There is no such political debate about any political issue now. There is little difference between in principle between Labour and the Tories. The Tories are totally unwilling to oppose Labour on an ideological level. That is the reason why they are continuing to lose elections.
The impact of Thatcherism and the collapse of communism forced the realignment on the left of British politics. The impact of New Labour has not forced a realignment on the right of British politics, which is still monopolised by the Conservative Party. It is true that UKIP did well in the EU elections last year, but that has been a fleeting event. UKIP is a single issue party and is as equally committed to political correctness as are the Tories.
The Tories still believe that the reason that they have not won a general election recently is because they are perceived as not being nice, and that if they show how nice they are then they will win. They are afraid as being seen as the ‘nasty party’ - as defined by the neo-communist politically correct.
The Tories still do not understand that it was their dabbling with socialism which led to their demise. The sight of Norman Lamont announcing the UK’s exit from the ERM, after all the lies we had been told that membership of the ERM was essential for this country’s prosperity. All the unemployment, the negative equity, the bankruptcies, repossessions, massive tax increases, and general sacrifice of the national interest meant nothing to the Tories. It was all water off a duck’s back.
It was the Tories’ commitment to the EU and their ever increasing commitment to socialism that was the reason for their ejection from office (Cool Britannia, the Millennium Dome, and the nationalisation of the family were all Tory initiatives - to name but a few).
The Tories’ response to New Labour has been to adopt their own version of political correctness, support mass immigration, support postal ballots, support devolution, and they have not even objected to the scandalous failure of the Boundary Commission to do its job properly despite the obvious electoral consequences. Yet all of these matters strengthen Labour’s grip on power.
Labour has reduced the number of Scottish MPs at this election. But not by enough for even a British parliament. English constituencies have an electorate of around 66,000 to 70,000. There are exceptions and some have more and some less. Labour held constituencies tend to have fewer electors which is to their advantage. But even after the boundary changes in Scotland, Scotland still has constituencies such as Na H-Eileanan An Iar, which has an electorate of only 21,576, or Orkney and Shetland, which has an electorate of 33,048.
Wales has also benefited from this scandal. Ceredigion has an electorate of only 53,493. Clwyd South and Clwyd West have electorates of only 52,353 and 55,642 respectively.
These are only examples and not a complete analysis. It is agreed, even by Labour, that the failure to properly update the constituency boundaries works in their favour. This scandal needs to be properly addressed urgently. The proposed boundary changes as they currently stand will still leave Labour with a distinct advantage.
Of course, all the Scottish and Welsh MPs still vote on English affairs. Labour lost the general election in England and is relying on its Scottish and Welsh MPs to enable it to outvote the English. Scottish MPs for other parties (including their nationalist parties) are also socialist.
The Tories are still trying to play Labour’s game and win votes in Scotland and Wales, despite having only 3 Welsh MPs and only 1 Scottish MP. The Tories are more than happy to sell out the English in that objective, as Oliver Letwin was quite open about in his letter extolling the virtues of the Barnett Formula and how the Tories intended to add on a block grant as well to give away even more English money.
Of course, there are many Scottish Tory refugees sitting as Conservative MPs in English constituencies. These MPs have no reason to end their own political careers by advocating an English parliament. They are happy with the devolution settlement and the end of genuine democracy in England.
But they have failed to win elections in Scotland and Wales and will continue to fail. The manner of devolution and the manner of the funding of the Scottish and Welsh parliaments is a perfect breeding ground for socialism.
It has always been a hallmark of socialism that someone else should pay. That there are groups in society who are oppressed and that it is the role of the government to tax and expropriate property from the oppressors and give it to the oppressed (after taking their own cut first, of course).
Do you see that chap over there with a Rolls Royce? Well, he has a Rolls Royce and you do not, so you can be subsidised at his expense. Do you see that women with a fur coat? Well, if that fur coat had been redistributed then you would be better off. Did you see what happened to Mel Gibson in that film Braveheart? By God! Do not even hesitate! You set up shop with a new £400million parliament and send the English the bill, and a further £10billion per year for good measure.
It has recently been revealed that public spending in Wales is 60% of local GDP, and also in the North East of England (where Labour tried to win a referendum on regionalisation). In Scotland the figure is similar. This is comparable to Eastern European countries under communism.
Labour is looting England and using the money to buy votes in Scotland and Wales, and then those bought Scottish and Welsh MPs are trooping south to ensure that Labour remains in power in England. This is a vicious circle which is further exacerbated by the scale of mass immigration.
Recent figures show that 140,795 immigrants became British citizens last year. This is 4 times the number as when Labour came to office. Since 1997, Labour has given British citizenship to more than 700,000 foreigners. British passports are being dished out as if they were nothing more than confetti.
At this rate there will be at another 600,000 British passports issued to foreigners before the next general election and possibly as many as 700,000 (depending on the timing of the election). The overwhelming majority of immigrants who vote, vote for a left wing party, mostly Labour.
Labour plans to ultimately turn the English into a racial minority in their own country.
But there is a spanner in the works. The English are starting to wake up to what is happening. They have always been opposed to mass immigration (as are a majority of the non-white population as well) and are angry at the anomaly of the West Lothian Question and being dictated to by Scottish and Welsh. They are currently less aware of the Barnett Formula and the unjustified subsidy to Scotland and Wales, but it is only a question of time before that too impacts upon the English national consciousness.
The creation of an English parliament will end Labour rule in England. Labour know this. It is their Achilles heel. That is why they will fight tooth and nail to prevent the creation of such a parliament.
Not only would an English parliament affect Labour in England, but when the Scots and Welsh have to pay their own bills for a change, then Labour will find that its high-spending vote-buying ways in those countries will be under threat as well.
An English parliament is the key issue in British politics.
The English need a new political party to represent their own interests, and put the English on an equal footing with the Scottish and Welsh. The Scots and the Welsh have their own national parties (the SNP and Plaid Cymru) and the English too now need their own party.
The Tories are a complete washout. They have betrayed the English for far too long.
But in many ways, this is merely the chickens coming home to roast. The problem with the Conservative Party is not recent. It has existed since the Second World War, if not before.
The Tories have never really opposed socialism. They have never really been willing to present the moral and technical arguments against socialism. Instead, they have preferred to present their own watered-down version of it.
For very many years, the Tories implemented wage controls, price controls, printed money, had beer and sandwiches with union barons, and tried to run nationalised industries just as Labour would do. Only they believed that they could do it better.
In the 1970s, as Heath blundered into his own bout of high spending, money-printing socialism, the ratchet principle was identified. Every time Labour took office they would move the country closer to a full socialist state. Yet when the Tories took office, they were never willing to reverse that trend. Instead the country merely had a breathing space before Labour took office again and the shift towards a socialist state continued.
Whenever Labour took office, the Tories always knew that Labour’s commitment to nationalisation and Clause 4 of its constitution would inexorably lead to economic catastrophe. At which point, inflation rocketed, the IMF would be called in, or major cuts in government spending would be implemented - often accompanied with widespread strikes and work to rules etc.
Inevitably, Labour would then lose the following general election and the Tories would take power once again. All the Tories had to do was sit back and await the inevitable economic disaster.
But then there was a change. With the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the communist satellite states across eastern Europe, culminating with the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union itself, and the cumulative effect of successive election defeats by Labour, Labour ditched Clause 4, abandoned the economic aspects of socialism such as nationalisation, and repackaged itself as New Labour. A combination of a tolerance of capitalism with a concentration on political correctness in all its neo-communist glory.
New Labour was the product of a major realignment on the left of British politics, which involved the launch and collapse of the SDP, the purge of Militant Tendency within Labour, and the collapse of the Communist Party. This also affected the centre of British politics with the merger of the SDP with the Liberal Party.
On the right of British politics, there had been the emergence of the so-called New Right in the 1970s, which evolved into Thatcherism. This was basically economic liberalism (free markets, free trade etc), with a particular emphasis on monetarism. Monetarism was the answer to Keynesianism and the solution to inflation. All of this was hotly debated at the time and it is easy to forget the impact that monetarism had, the extent of the intellectual differences, and the scale of the fierce political debate which eventually propelled Margaret Thatcher into office.
There is no such political debate about any political issue now. There is little difference between in principle between Labour and the Tories. The Tories are totally unwilling to oppose Labour on an ideological level. That is the reason why they are continuing to lose elections.
The impact of Thatcherism and the collapse of communism forced the realignment on the left of British politics. The impact of New Labour has not forced a realignment on the right of British politics, which is still monopolised by the Conservative Party. It is true that UKIP did well in the EU elections last year, but that has been a fleeting event. UKIP is a single issue party and is as equally committed to political correctness as are the Tories.
The Tories still believe that the reason that they have not won a general election recently is because they are perceived as not being nice, and that if they show how nice they are then they will win. They are afraid as being seen as the ‘nasty party’ - as defined by the neo-communist politically correct.
The Tories still do not understand that it was their dabbling with socialism which led to their demise. The sight of Norman Lamont announcing the UK’s exit from the ERM, after all the lies we had been told that membership of the ERM was essential for this country’s prosperity. All the unemployment, the negative equity, the bankruptcies, repossessions, massive tax increases, and general sacrifice of the national interest meant nothing to the Tories. It was all water off a duck’s back.
It was the Tories’ commitment to the EU and their ever increasing commitment to socialism that was the reason for their ejection from office (Cool Britannia, the Millennium Dome, and the nationalisation of the family were all Tory initiatives - to name but a few).
The Tories’ response to New Labour has been to adopt their own version of political correctness, support mass immigration, support postal ballots, support devolution, and they have not even objected to the scandalous failure of the Boundary Commission to do its job properly despite the obvious electoral consequences. Yet all of these matters strengthen Labour’s grip on power.
Labour has reduced the number of Scottish MPs at this election. But not by enough for even a British parliament. English constituencies have an electorate of around 66,000 to 70,000. There are exceptions and some have more and some less. Labour held constituencies tend to have fewer electors which is to their advantage. But even after the boundary changes in Scotland, Scotland still has constituencies such as Na H-Eileanan An Iar, which has an electorate of only 21,576, or Orkney and Shetland, which has an electorate of 33,048.
Wales has also benefited from this scandal. Ceredigion has an electorate of only 53,493. Clwyd South and Clwyd West have electorates of only 52,353 and 55,642 respectively.
These are only examples and not a complete analysis. It is agreed, even by Labour, that the failure to properly update the constituency boundaries works in their favour. This scandal needs to be properly addressed urgently. The proposed boundary changes as they currently stand will still leave Labour with a distinct advantage.
Of course, all the Scottish and Welsh MPs still vote on English affairs. Labour lost the general election in England and is relying on its Scottish and Welsh MPs to enable it to outvote the English. Scottish MPs for other parties (including their nationalist parties) are also socialist.
The Tories are still trying to play Labour’s game and win votes in Scotland and Wales, despite having only 3 Welsh MPs and only 1 Scottish MP. The Tories are more than happy to sell out the English in that objective, as Oliver Letwin was quite open about in his letter extolling the virtues of the Barnett Formula and how the Tories intended to add on a block grant as well to give away even more English money.
Of course, there are many Scottish Tory refugees sitting as Conservative MPs in English constituencies. These MPs have no reason to end their own political careers by advocating an English parliament. They are happy with the devolution settlement and the end of genuine democracy in England.
But they have failed to win elections in Scotland and Wales and will continue to fail. The manner of devolution and the manner of the funding of the Scottish and Welsh parliaments is a perfect breeding ground for socialism.
It has always been a hallmark of socialism that someone else should pay. That there are groups in society who are oppressed and that it is the role of the government to tax and expropriate property from the oppressors and give it to the oppressed (after taking their own cut first, of course).
Do you see that chap over there with a Rolls Royce? Well, he has a Rolls Royce and you do not, so you can be subsidised at his expense. Do you see that women with a fur coat? Well, if that fur coat had been redistributed then you would be better off. Did you see what happened to Mel Gibson in that film Braveheart? By God! Do not even hesitate! You set up shop with a new £400million parliament and send the English the bill, and a further £10billion per year for good measure.
It has recently been revealed that public spending in Wales is 60% of local GDP, and also in the North East of England (where Labour tried to win a referendum on regionalisation). In Scotland the figure is similar. This is comparable to Eastern European countries under communism.
Labour is looting England and using the money to buy votes in Scotland and Wales, and then those bought Scottish and Welsh MPs are trooping south to ensure that Labour remains in power in England. This is a vicious circle which is further exacerbated by the scale of mass immigration.
Recent figures show that 140,795 immigrants became British citizens last year. This is 4 times the number as when Labour came to office. Since 1997, Labour has given British citizenship to more than 700,000 foreigners. British passports are being dished out as if they were nothing more than confetti.
At this rate there will be at another 600,000 British passports issued to foreigners before the next general election and possibly as many as 700,000 (depending on the timing of the election). The overwhelming majority of immigrants who vote, vote for a left wing party, mostly Labour.
Labour plans to ultimately turn the English into a racial minority in their own country.
But there is a spanner in the works. The English are starting to wake up to what is happening. They have always been opposed to mass immigration (as are a majority of the non-white population as well) and are angry at the anomaly of the West Lothian Question and being dictated to by Scottish and Welsh. They are currently less aware of the Barnett Formula and the unjustified subsidy to Scotland and Wales, but it is only a question of time before that too impacts upon the English national consciousness.
The creation of an English parliament will end Labour rule in England. Labour know this. It is their Achilles heel. That is why they will fight tooth and nail to prevent the creation of such a parliament.
Not only would an English parliament affect Labour in England, but when the Scots and Welsh have to pay their own bills for a change, then Labour will find that its high-spending vote-buying ways in those countries will be under threat as well.
An English parliament is the key issue in British politics.
The English need a new political party to represent their own interests, and put the English on an equal footing with the Scottish and Welsh. The Scots and the Welsh have their own national parties (the SNP and Plaid Cymru) and the English too now need their own party.
The Tories are a complete washout. They have betrayed the English for far too long.
posted by erc @ 6:17 pm
<< Home