Jack Straw got banner headlines yesterday when he criticised the Human Rights Act and stated that we have got to change it as it is not working properly. I thought this was really decent of him after something like ten years of British injustice largely due to lawyers (like Cherie Blair) who found loopholes in it so that criminals could not be effectively punished and illegal immigrants who commit crime could not be sent home. If my memory serves me correctly it was Jack Straw who introduced it in the first place.
However, he stopped short of saying what he wanted to do and when he would do it. Jack Straw you see is very good at soundbytes. He has been doing it all through his political life. He has held all of the important and influential positions and has yet to make a success of any of them. He just seems to bounce around the cabinet breezing from position to position and fouling up everything that he touches. You can be assured that Jack Straw will do nothing to change anything but will continue to grovel to the Muslim voters in Blackburn who keep him in parliament.
David Cameron on the other hand says that he will do something about it and proposes abolishing the European Human Rights Act and replacing it with a British Bill of Rights. He alleges that this will be part of the battleground for the next election. I certainly hope so because I am becoming increasingly frustrated by the inability of the Tories to hurt this despicable government fatally despite having every opportunity to do so. I really thought that some of them would have the guts to really attack The Speaker and the government over the Damian Green affair but the attack fizzled out as usual allowing the govenrment to fall back on their Committee of enquiry answer to everything.
I really despair of anything happening which the man in the street requires to make his life even slightly more agreeable.
Tuesday, 9 December 2008
Monday, 8 December 2008
Social Services
It is just coming from Sky News that Sharon Shoesmith the Head of Social Services for Haringey Council has been dismissed with immediate effect. I just wonder if that means she walks away without a compensation package? The sacking is of course the only decision that could be taken but somehow NoLab always appear to have another agenda. I wonder where she will pop up next.
Take the £73 million pound package that Ed Balls has announced to retrain the Social Services staff. He still doesn't get it! With the best will in the world the staff cannot look after the kids in a safe and sensible manner and abide by government targets.
The targets are the problem not the staff although I can understand how some of the younger ones who have not been brought up in an era where common sense was inbred and was passed down by both mother and father should probably be given additional support.
I am sure that they will not be trying to recruit older men women who have that common sense and who have brought up familes of their own. Their abhorrence of nonsensical targets which actually endanger the kids would make them unemployable by this government. What a mess!
Take the £73 million pound package that Ed Balls has announced to retrain the Social Services staff. He still doesn't get it! With the best will in the world the staff cannot look after the kids in a safe and sensible manner and abide by government targets.
The targets are the problem not the staff although I can understand how some of the younger ones who have not been brought up in an era where common sense was inbred and was passed down by both mother and father should probably be given additional support.
I am sure that they will not be trying to recruit older men women who have that common sense and who have brought up familes of their own. Their abhorrence of nonsensical targets which actually endanger the kids would make them unemployable by this government. What a mess!
Saturday, 6 December 2008
The Banking Bill
Guido Fawkes has flagged up an item which should be concerning all of us and is already being followed up on other blogs. This government has introduced an amendment to the Banking Bill of 1844. This Bill in simplistic terms seems to govern how much money we actually release into the community.
The government (Darling and Brown) have apparently introduced an amendment to the Bill which has kept the country on a level track for 164 years. They want to abolish the principle that the amount of money coming off the presses each week should be published so that our economy does not descend into the gutter like for example the economy of Zimbabwe.
Why do they want to do that? Why destroy a principle which has served us so well for so long? I am beginning to think that these people are becoming desperate and that really worries me. Are they really planning to print more money than is appropriate to keep our economy stable.
Can it get any worse? I guess so.
The government (Darling and Brown) have apparently introduced an amendment to the Bill which has kept the country on a level track for 164 years. They want to abolish the principle that the amount of money coming off the presses each week should be published so that our economy does not descend into the gutter like for example the economy of Zimbabwe.
Why do they want to do that? Why destroy a principle which has served us so well for so long? I am beginning to think that these people are becoming desperate and that really worries me. Are they really planning to print more money than is appropriate to keep our economy stable.
Can it get any worse? I guess so.
Social Services
Ever since the 'Baby P' case I have been concerned about the way that the Social Services operate. Instinctively I had a gut feeling that the fault lay with NoLab but as I was completely ignorant of the procedures of the Social Services it was difficult to comment with confidence.
Today all the pieces of the jigsaw fell into place when I read an article in the Daily Mail. Social Workers are forced to comply with government protection targets. These targets insist that children are removed from the Child Protection Register after two years. They are also 'encouraged' to reduce the number of children that they put into care or with foster parents. This means that children are quite routinely returned to inadequate or dangerous parents even if the social worker concerned feels that it is the wrong decision.
This is why Ofsted inspectors rated both Haringey (Baby P) and Kirklees (Shannon Matthews) as 'services which consistently deliver above minimum requirements for children'. These are the politics of madness! How many more children have been returned to families who are not capable of looking after them? Now we know what the problems are and as I suspected Ed Balls has to take his share of the blame for the despicable cases which have recently made the headlines.
Government targets should never be allowed to supercede the experience and common sense of the people on the ground. The misery that these targets must have caused children all over the country will probably never be calculated.
NoLab have interfered in every aspect of our lives in this country. They are fouling everything up and yet some of the electorate still think that they are worth supporting. What can we say about people who put their warped targets against the safety of the nation's children. It is nauseating!
Today all the pieces of the jigsaw fell into place when I read an article in the Daily Mail. Social Workers are forced to comply with government protection targets. These targets insist that children are removed from the Child Protection Register after two years. They are also 'encouraged' to reduce the number of children that they put into care or with foster parents. This means that children are quite routinely returned to inadequate or dangerous parents even if the social worker concerned feels that it is the wrong decision.
This is why Ofsted inspectors rated both Haringey (Baby P) and Kirklees (Shannon Matthews) as 'services which consistently deliver above minimum requirements for children'. These are the politics of madness! How many more children have been returned to families who are not capable of looking after them? Now we know what the problems are and as I suspected Ed Balls has to take his share of the blame for the despicable cases which have recently made the headlines.
Government targets should never be allowed to supercede the experience and common sense of the people on the ground. The misery that these targets must have caused children all over the country will probably never be calculated.
NoLab have interfered in every aspect of our lives in this country. They are fouling everything up and yet some of the electorate still think that they are worth supporting. What can we say about people who put their warped targets against the safety of the nation's children. It is nauseating!
Friday, 5 December 2008
The Sub Culture
On 25 November I wrote about the kids who bring head lice into schools and how nobody seems to do anything to help them. I have since been told that I forgot the 'worms' which are once again passed from kid to kid in the classroom. Everybody knows who the kids are who bring them into the school. Some of the poor mites can barely articulate at the age of five.
Now please do not tell me that the friends, family and more importantly the school who were familiar with poor little Sharron Matthews did not know that her mother was an uncaring slob. So why didn't someone do something about it? Well former neighbours say they did but nobody bothered to follow it up effectively. This once again lays the fault at the feet of the Social Services and I have no doubt that they are probably following a set of flawed guidelines. However is it hardly surprising because the sub culture which is breeding very quickly on the rundown council estates is growing at an alarming rate.
You see them everywhere, young pregnant girls with unwashed hair and a couple of mucky kids puffing on cigarettes buying booze from the supermarkets. If a passing Social Worker did a spot check on the kids there would probably be a myriad of problems.
What I don't understand is that no politician is addressing the problem. Nobody has any ideas to try and reverse the trend which has been growing for the past thirty years. The women who have large families by different men survive on the money that they get for being a baby factory. They live in dwellings which they were granted for being pregnant! It must stop. Somebody must bite the bullet and come up with some form of incentive to stop the women from breeding. The money must cease after say two kids. If they do not get the money then they won't bother having the kids.
We now hundreds of grandmothers in their early thirties. All around them is squalor and more and more these cases are being picked up by the mainstream media. They are horrific but we seem to be getting immune to it. Only when cases like 'Baby 'P' and Sharron Matthews hit the headlines are we horrified but it is happening all around us and we just shut our eyes and hope that they will disappear back to their squalid little homes so that we can forget their existence.
The police are not on the steets anymore, the teaching profession is scared of its own shadow, the health officials are so busy being 'nice' that these poor kids are just left until they reach puberty where they can start the whole cycle off again.
It is a national disgrace!
Now please do not tell me that the friends, family and more importantly the school who were familiar with poor little Sharron Matthews did not know that her mother was an uncaring slob. So why didn't someone do something about it? Well former neighbours say they did but nobody bothered to follow it up effectively. This once again lays the fault at the feet of the Social Services and I have no doubt that they are probably following a set of flawed guidelines. However is it hardly surprising because the sub culture which is breeding very quickly on the rundown council estates is growing at an alarming rate.
You see them everywhere, young pregnant girls with unwashed hair and a couple of mucky kids puffing on cigarettes buying booze from the supermarkets. If a passing Social Worker did a spot check on the kids there would probably be a myriad of problems.
What I don't understand is that no politician is addressing the problem. Nobody has any ideas to try and reverse the trend which has been growing for the past thirty years. The women who have large families by different men survive on the money that they get for being a baby factory. They live in dwellings which they were granted for being pregnant! It must stop. Somebody must bite the bullet and come up with some form of incentive to stop the women from breeding. The money must cease after say two kids. If they do not get the money then they won't bother having the kids.
We now hundreds of grandmothers in their early thirties. All around them is squalor and more and more these cases are being picked up by the mainstream media. They are horrific but we seem to be getting immune to it. Only when cases like 'Baby 'P' and Sharron Matthews hit the headlines are we horrified but it is happening all around us and we just shut our eyes and hope that they will disappear back to their squalid little homes so that we can forget their existence.
The police are not on the steets anymore, the teaching profession is scared of its own shadow, the health officials are so busy being 'nice' that these poor kids are just left until they reach puberty where they can start the whole cycle off again.
It is a national disgrace!
Thursday, 4 December 2008
Foreign Aid
I read today that we are pouring aid into Zimbabwe to assist their fight against cholera. I cannot believe that in this age of the credit crunch when our own pensioners are struggling with their household bills that this government believes that handing money to Robert Mugabe will help his people. Are they mad?
After all we have David Milliband (last seen waving a banana at the press) as our Foreign Secretary. I would imagine that our allies (do our allies matter any more now that we are ruled by Europe) just laugh at this clown. The only reason that we are respected in this world is that we scatter foreign aid around the world like confetti. This is in an age when we have a credit crunch. Countries like Zimbabse and Pakistan ceased to be our problem years ago. They kicked us out! Why should we pour money into Robert Mugabes' coffers because as sure as eggs are eggs he will squander it!
It will NEVER get to the people who need it but then why should that matter?
Don't get me wrong I suffer alongside the poor people who have been so let down by successive British governments. They did however vote to kick us out and we cannot possibly be responsible for that. When we left Zimbabwe then that was it! We no longer had a responsibilty for the people who remained. Why do we still give this country aid because they are a responsibility of Africa.
The same has to be said for Pakistan. Why do we give money to Pakistan? This country has no love for anything British. They hate us! In my opinion the Pakistanis hate everybody but that is another question.
This is the legacy of NoLab and why we have so little money for the people who matter in this country. They just fritter it away on liberal causes because they want money and hope that these countries will respect Gordon Brown!
Yeah right!
Gordon we cannot afford to give money to countries like Pakistan and Zimbabwe! Guess what? They hate us! The money that you give them will never,ever get to the people that need it. How about redirecting it to the people who really need it, the
citizens of Britain!
In these really difficult times we should inform countries liked Zimbabwe and Pakistan that the well has run dry. If they want British subsidies then they should generally act like civiilised countries and if they don't then they can fund themselves!
After all we have David Milliband (last seen waving a banana at the press) as our Foreign Secretary. I would imagine that our allies (do our allies matter any more now that we are ruled by Europe) just laugh at this clown. The only reason that we are respected in this world is that we scatter foreign aid around the world like confetti. This is in an age when we have a credit crunch. Countries like Zimbabse and Pakistan ceased to be our problem years ago. They kicked us out! Why should we pour money into Robert Mugabes' coffers because as sure as eggs are eggs he will squander it!
It will NEVER get to the people who need it but then why should that matter?
Don't get me wrong I suffer alongside the poor people who have been so let down by successive British governments. They did however vote to kick us out and we cannot possibly be responsible for that. When we left Zimbabwe then that was it! We no longer had a responsibilty for the people who remained. Why do we still give this country aid because they are a responsibility of Africa.
The same has to be said for Pakistan. Why do we give money to Pakistan? This country has no love for anything British. They hate us! In my opinion the Pakistanis hate everybody but that is another question.
This is the legacy of NoLab and why we have so little money for the people who matter in this country. They just fritter it away on liberal causes because they want money and hope that these countries will respect Gordon Brown!
Yeah right!
Gordon we cannot afford to give money to countries like Pakistan and Zimbabwe! Guess what? They hate us! The money that you give them will never,ever get to the people that need it. How about redirecting it to the people who really need it, the
citizens of Britain!
In these really difficult times we should inform countries liked Zimbabwe and Pakistan that the well has run dry. If they want British subsidies then they should generally act like civiilised countries and if they don't then they can fund themselves!
Wednesday, 3 December 2008
The Speaker
I can hardly credit the mess that is erupting in Parliament. The police entered Parliament without a warrant. They were given access by a former quite junior Civil Servant Jill Pays who was appointed by The Speaker himself. The reason that she got the job was that The Speaker could not get on with her predecessor. Her predecessor was a former Major General in the army who of course would command respect.
The Speaker was a former sheet metal worker from Glasgow who has been a class warrior all of his life. Ability, experience and tradition play little part if that person does not tug his forelock to the mandarins of the New Labour Project. They are a mean, spiteful, small minded crew so Major General Grant Peterkin was binned.
In his place The Speaker must have cast the net wide and far to avoid the traditional appointment of a military man as Sargeant-at-Arms. For some reason he came up with Jill Pays. I don't know what her credentials for this position were but one suspects that if you are trying to trash tradition then the best way is to appoint a woman to the position of Sargeant-at-Arms. Nice one Mick!
Now we come to the problem. He stood up today and announced that it was not him who invited the police into the House of Commons thus breaking centuries of tradition. It was the Sargeant-at-Arms and she allowed them in despite the fact that they did not have a search warrant.
Now apparently they should have told her that they didn't have a warrant and their presence in the building depended solely on her permission. She didn't ask and they didn't confess so the whole episode is that an MP's office was raided illegally.
As I have already blogged the appointment of Jill Pays was ignored by the Queen because she refused this overpromoted Civil Servant the traditional audience. The Queen is no fool so she must have smelt a rat and acted accordingly. It is utterly astonishing that this was not widely reported. Now the former sheet metal worker is blaming his appointed Sargeant-at-Arms! Is that just not typical?!
They cling to an authority they have long since lost and when their incompetence is exposed then they blame the very people they have appointed who The Queen herself apparently rejected. Jill Pays quite clearly did not understand her role and allowed police without a warrant to enter the office of an MP.
I am currently watching the abject performance of Harriet Harman on Newsnight and she is so embarrassed by this issue that she is refusing to confirm that she has full confidence in The Speaker and the Sargeant-at-Arms. She is the Leader of the House of Commons. What does that say about this government?
It is obvious that the appointment of an unqualified Sargeant-at-Arms has led to this fiasco but don't blame Jill Pays. If I got the chance I would probably take it (no I wouldn't)but I would swot up on my responsibilities. Major General Peterkin would have sorted it tout suite! His response would probably take the lines of 'No Way, get lost you chancers and come back with a warrant!'
Everyone who has ever achieved anything knows that your personal choice of staff is paramount to your survival and impacts on you. If you choose your staff purely on their ability to tug their forelocks then I am sorry you appoint people on the wrong premise.
Jill Pays was the wrong person. The Speaker should resign tomorrow because he appointed a patsy to a sigificant parliamentary role. Gordon Brown...the worst ever British Prime Minister...we don't even need a vote!
The Speaker was a former sheet metal worker from Glasgow who has been a class warrior all of his life. Ability, experience and tradition play little part if that person does not tug his forelock to the mandarins of the New Labour Project. They are a mean, spiteful, small minded crew so Major General Grant Peterkin was binned.
In his place The Speaker must have cast the net wide and far to avoid the traditional appointment of a military man as Sargeant-at-Arms. For some reason he came up with Jill Pays. I don't know what her credentials for this position were but one suspects that if you are trying to trash tradition then the best way is to appoint a woman to the position of Sargeant-at-Arms. Nice one Mick!
Now we come to the problem. He stood up today and announced that it was not him who invited the police into the House of Commons thus breaking centuries of tradition. It was the Sargeant-at-Arms and she allowed them in despite the fact that they did not have a search warrant.
Now apparently they should have told her that they didn't have a warrant and their presence in the building depended solely on her permission. She didn't ask and they didn't confess so the whole episode is that an MP's office was raided illegally.
As I have already blogged the appointment of Jill Pays was ignored by the Queen because she refused this overpromoted Civil Servant the traditional audience. The Queen is no fool so she must have smelt a rat and acted accordingly. It is utterly astonishing that this was not widely reported. Now the former sheet metal worker is blaming his appointed Sargeant-at-Arms! Is that just not typical?!
They cling to an authority they have long since lost and when their incompetence is exposed then they blame the very people they have appointed who The Queen herself apparently rejected. Jill Pays quite clearly did not understand her role and allowed police without a warrant to enter the office of an MP.
I am currently watching the abject performance of Harriet Harman on Newsnight and she is so embarrassed by this issue that she is refusing to confirm that she has full confidence in The Speaker and the Sargeant-at-Arms. She is the Leader of the House of Commons. What does that say about this government?
It is obvious that the appointment of an unqualified Sargeant-at-Arms has led to this fiasco but don't blame Jill Pays. If I got the chance I would probably take it (no I wouldn't)but I would swot up on my responsibilities. Major General Peterkin would have sorted it tout suite! His response would probably take the lines of 'No Way, get lost you chancers and come back with a warrant!'
Everyone who has ever achieved anything knows that your personal choice of staff is paramount to your survival and impacts on you. If you choose your staff purely on their ability to tug their forelocks then I am sorry you appoint people on the wrong premise.
Jill Pays was the wrong person. The Speaker should resign tomorrow because he appointed a patsy to a sigificant parliamentary role. Gordon Brown...the worst ever British Prime Minister...we don't even need a vote!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)