close
Forum
-
by
Henri
Sunday, May 24 2009
David Cameron has announced that he will reopen the Conservative parliamentary candidates list.
In an interview on the Andrew Marr show, David said he wanted to “open up the talent that is available in Parliament".
And he urged people to apply for our candidates list even if they have never been involved in politics before:
“If you believe in public service, if you want to help us clean up politics, if you share our values come and be a Conservative candidate.”
http://www.conservatives.com/News/Ne...
-
by
Rangers Football Club
I agree totally with the Conservative party that Labour have ruined the British economy for many many years to come. And I am all for the consevative party and there love of the union. But at the end of the day in my opinion I believe the conservative party only care about the rich folk in the UK, to them its about helping those with money that can help the Consevatives.
There are more people in the Uk on the breadline in terms of there income than there is millionaires. The Conservatives need to show us ( the average people) that they are for the average joes, may i put it that way.
I am a Northern Irish ( British) Protestant, and right now i vote DUP. I know longer want to vote DUP as they are selling Northern Ireland down the river, by coming into goverment with Sinn Fein (supporters of terrerists) simply IRA scum. If the conservatives want to beat useless Labour in the next election then i think they can do it if they get the Unionists of Northern Ireland on there side. And they are starting to do that by getting Sir Reg and the UUP to come together with them.
I wouldn't be long in changing my vote to UUP (consevative) if the Conservative party would change there views on who they consider they are working for in this country, the rich people or the majority of the British people. But until that happens my vote is going to be a wasted vote, the same as many people who have the same views as myself. And other people with different views will not also vote because they don't believe in any kind of party and what they have to say, because bassically were told one thing then it turns out to be a lie in the long run. Dosnt matter what politicion says it, sadly its always the same old story
We need a goverment in charge of the UK that has a BACK BONE about them, which i seriously doubt will ever happen. It seriously is gettin ridiculous the state of our great nation with all this political correctness, which seriously is a load of bull.
Allowing these hate preachers to slate our Britsh culture and openly too on the land of Britain to say our brave soldiers should be killed, it's just not on.
That these same men that say these treacherous things should be allowed to keep doing it. And for nothing to be done about it.
If any person wants to live in the United Kingdom says such disgusting things and acts in this type of manner, in all honesty they should be arrested and put in jail, which would probably be a waste of time as it will probably cost us millions to keep them safe in a cushy British jail which these days is more like a holiday camp.
Instead of sayin oh no there allowed there freedom of speech. Which i totally believe in (our brave soldiers of the past fought for this right) but when it comes to this sort of thing it shouldnt be allowed.
Instead of giving them money to live here and looking after such people so well when they arn't here to do us any good, why should they be giving tax payers money, they should be sent out of here to where they belong.
How can either the conservatives or labour allow this to happen just baffles me, sorry sickens me to the core. Such crimes of treachery should result in death. And i mean that from the bottom of my heart, they should be tortured, hung made work for us, whatever it takes to punish them.
I mean for instance how can the courts send away ordinary people to jail for such petty things as not paying a stupid fine or things as mediorcore as that. When non British people can insite hate and get away with it scott free and not face jail. I mean i am up in court myself for a charge of causing injury to someone, beacuse i was assulted by a man who i fought back against and caused him an injury, and i might be looking jail time, which inevitably will affect me the rest of my life. I will find it hard to find a job etc etc.
Anyways they reckon its better to put such people in our over crowded jails but not these true criminals. And not just th
-
by
Christopher Holgate
Mr. Brown has said he will use his speech at the Labour Party Conference to say sorry for everything he's done wrong since he became Prime Minister. And with a lot to apologise for, he could be speaking for a long, long time.
Brown's Big Apology is due to take place on Tuesday 23rd September - and we'll be publishing one reason for him to say sorry every day up to then.
Chris Grayling, the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, stressed, "We're going to remind him every day until that speech just how much there is to apologise for."
Reason to apologise #1 - Raising taxes on Britain's poorest families
In his last Budget as Chancellor, Brown announced the abolition of the 10p starting rate of income tax, despite warnings it would hit 5.3 million low-earning families. And even after trying to undo the mess with more changes, 1.1 million low earners will still lose out by up to £112 a year.
Read George Osborne's criticism of Labour's 10p tax fiasco.
Reason to apologise #2 - Losing the personal data of 25 million people
On 20 November 2007, Alistair Darling admitted that discs containing the personal details of 25 million individuals, and the bank details of 15 million people, had been lost by HM Revenue and Customs.
Nick Herbert, the Shadow Secretary of State for Justice, called for Brown to apologise for Labour's "cavalier attitude to personal information and complete inability to deal with repeated breaches of data security."
Reason to apologise #3 - Blaming junior officials
Whether it's an article endorsing Barack Obama written in his name, the loss of half the nation's personal data or the confusion over taxing non-doms, Gordon Brown ducks responsibility and blames his officials at every opportunity. Instead of providing the strong leadership this country needs, Brown is showing himself to be Britain's weakest ever Prime Minister.
Reason to apologise #4 - Retrospectively taxing ordinary family cars
In this year's Budget, the Government announced a new, retrospective hike in Vehicle Excise Duty, meaning that drivers of 81 per cent of cars bought since 2001 will pay more in tax by 2010-11. Shadow Treasury Minister Justine Greening said:
"Gordon Brown claimed that this was a green tax. However, ministers had to admit that it will cut motor vehicle emissions by a fraction of 1% a year.....by 2020, costing £2.4bn more and leave 9.4m motorists worse off by 2010. It truly was a poll-tax on wheels."
Reason to apologise #5 - Capital Gains Tax uncertainty
In the 2007 Pre-Budget Report, Alistair Darling announced an 80% hike in Capital Gains Tax. Brown's Government then dithered for months, creating damaging confusion and uncertainty for business, before finally performing a U-turn in January of this year. The changed levy is still expected to raise £700 million from entrepreneurs.
Read George Osborne's reaction to Labour's Capital Gains Tax U-turn.
Reason to apologise #6 - Spin over Iraq troop withdrawals
In October last year, Mr. Brown flew to Iraq to announce that 1,000 British troops would be brought home from the region by Christmas - but the withdrawal of 500 of those troops had already been announced, and a further 270 had already returned to the UK.
Brown's announcement was just pure political opportunism, and Liam Fox, the Shadow Defence Secretary, slammed his use of the Armed Forces for "political purposes":
"This is indicative of the poor treatment that the Armed Forces have received from Gordon Brown over the past 11 years. He should apologise."
Reason to apologise #7 - Damaging dithering over Stamp Duty
In August, Labour spin doctors briefed the media that a Stamp Duty holiday would be introduced as part of Brown's Economic Recovery Plan. As a result, potential homebuyers held off on making purchases, causing further damage to an already slowing housing market.
Grant Shapps, the Shadow Housing Minister, condemned Brown's actions as "a cyni
close
Blog
-
Daniel Hannan MEP: Seven reasons why Conservatives must leave the EPP
Daniel Hannan is an MEP for the South East and blogs at Telegraph.co.uk.
Hannan_danSome of you may find this hard to believe, but I’m going to miss Christopher Beazley. The pro-euro MEP has decided not to seek re-nomination – mainly, he says, because he disagrees with the Conservative Party’s commitment to leave the European People’s Party (EPP) in 2009 and form a new, anti-federalist group in the European Parliament. All Euro-candidates have been asked to sign a statement in support of party policy. A lesser man might have held his nose and signed, or signed with his fingers crossed behind his back; but Chris has behaved with edifying principle. Heaven knows he and I have disagreed over the years. But he has never sought to disguise opinions which he knows to be unpopular with his constituents. Not every politician can make the same boast.
Now is a good moment to remind ourselves of why David Cameron has promised to leave the EPP, and why candidates are being asked to support him.
(1) The European Parliament lacks an Official Opposition
At present, every political alliance in Europe – the Communists, the Socialists, the Liberals, the Greens, the Christian Democrats – supports the euro, the constitution, a common foreign policy and an EU criminal justice system. Indeed, the EPP goes further than the others, demanding a single EU seat at the United Nations, a European army and police force and – my particular favourite, this – a pan-EU income tax to be levied by MEPs. Once there is a mainstream conservative bloc positing a different kind of Europe, the cartel will be broken. From that moment, Euro-federalism will cease to be inevitable, and become one among a series of competing ideas.
(2) Our message must be consistent
“I want Conservatives to be saying the same thing in Westminster, in Brussels and in Strasbourg,” says David Cameron. Spot on. In the past we have suffered electorally – especially at the 2004 European Election, when we got our worst share of the vote since 1832 – because we were thought to be dissembling. We fought Euro-sceptic campaigns in Britain and then, when elected, we scuttled off and sat with the most integrationist group in the chamber.
(3) An independent group will control its own resources
Every political group in the European Parliament receives millions of euros for political activism. Some of this money is passed on to the national parties to allocate as they wish; but a good deal is held back to spend on pan-European campaigns. So what does the EPP spend our money on? You guessed it: campaigns to promote the European Constitution, the Common Agricultural Policy, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and so on. A chunk of money – the money to which Tory MEPs ought to have been entitled – was spent in support of “Yes” campaigners when Sweden voted on the euro. Outside the EPP, we’d be free to create a campaigning machine to promote a completely different vision of Europe: one based on free markets, national independence and the Atlantic Alliance. This, of course, is what the other side fears.
(4) Leaving the EPP will put Conservatives in the mainstream
Nothing – nothing – could be further from the truth than the idea that the only parties outside the EPP are far-Right. The persistence of the notion that “Tory MEPs may end up with Italian fascists” is one of the most successful pieces of black propaganda I’ve ever encountered. No one has ever proposed such a thing and, for what it’s worth, the party that is descended from Mussolini’s, the Alleanza Nazionale, is currently applying to join the EPP. Nor does anyone deny that there were enough respectable parties to form a new group two years ago. This time, there are several more parties in play, including from Romania and Bulgaria, as well as others that have become uncomfortable with their existing affiliations. G
-
ConservativeHome's Platform« Peter Bone MP: NICE was right to U-turn on allowing wet eye treatments on the NHS | Main | Tobias Ellwood MP: Hotting up for a new Cold War »
Chris Heaton-Harris MEP: A Rough Guide to the EU Budget
Chris Heaton-Harris writes A Rough Guide to the EU's Draft Budget for 2009.
For the past nine years or so I have been a Member of the Audit Committee of the European Parliament (known as "Budgetary Control") and have been trying to make some sense of the Budgets of both the European Commission and European Parliament.
We all know that every year the European Court of Auditors fails to sign off (or as they say “give a positive statement of assurance on”) the accounts of the European Commission and one question every candidate for the European elections next year will be asked is “what are you going to do to stop all the fraud, waste and maladministration, so that the accounts get signed off?”
Well, this time of year is budget time! Cannily, the process was designed so that just about everyone in the European Parliament who might care about the Budget is away on holiday around the time amendments for the budget should be submitted. This year most Committees of the Parliament (which only returned from recess on 25th August) have deadlines for the tabling of amendments around the 27th August. As you will see later on, almost every item of expenditure has its own “budget line” and this is what MEPs will try to amend. This is where MEPs, if they wanted to, could try to tame the beast.
Every year, helped by my poor members of staff, I go through the budget over the summer months and table dozens (occasionally hundreds) of amendments to try and prune out some of the rubbish that I have found contained within it. Every year I lose most of these amendments in the Committee and Plenary votes, thanks to EPP, Socialist and Liberal MEPs defending the status quo. And every year I still get asked by hundreds of different people why am I not doing anything about it!
This year is my last attempt, as I am standing down from the European Parliament next June and moving onto pastures new. However, I don’t want to leave this subject alone; I want to try and translate the Budget into plain English to explain how much money is spent by the European Institutions, where it goes, and why it is mightily difficult to make any amendments to the Budget at all. Whilst I have made the occasional political comment, the whole point of this exercise is not to say that all this is a complete waste of money and we shouldn’t give Europe a penny (although, given the accounts are never signed off, I do subscribe to that argument) – the idea here is to try and describe how big the beast is and how the scrutiny process works.
THE EU'S BUDGET FOR THE COMING YEAR IS £116BN
Firstly the numbers: all the amounts I talk about below are contained within the “Draft Budget” and most can be amended by the European Parliament or Member State governments should they want to.
This year the total Draft Budget for the European Union is £116bn. This is a 3.1% increase on last year’s amount. Of this money the European Commission’s 2009 draft budget is £95bn and the European Parliament’s 2009 draft budget is £1.25bn.
The European Commission: OK, so let’s look at the big beast first – the draft budget for the European Commission for 2009 of £95bn (yes, billion!)
- Agriculture & Fisheries
Unsurprisingly, the single biggest expense belongs to the agricultural sector and the Common Agricultural Policy – it accounts for a whopping £35.75bn! In addition to this, you will find that the UK is paying more than any other Member State in agricultural levies to the Commission - £374m. At a time of rapidly rising food costs, this is essentially just an extra European protectionist tax being levied on UK consumers.
Some of the items in the agriculture and fisheries draft budget for 2009 incl
-
Rupert Matthews: Why is the EU so undemocratic?
Rupert Matthews is a freelance writer and is currently one of the MEP candidates for the Conservative Party in the East Midlands Region.
You don’t have to go very far in the EU to realise that it is an undemocratic institution. It holds plenty of public votes, of course, but real power lurks in private rooms and flits about in luxuriously appointed corridors. Try to find it, and it slips away like a phantom.
The Treaty of Lisbon (EU Constitution) will only make things worse. But how did we get here in the first place? Why are those who run the EU determined to keep the whole institution so undemocratic?
The answer lies in the past – but then I’m a historian so maybe I am biased.
Those who established the EEC had lived through two devastating world wars, both of which had as an underlying cause the rivalry between France and Germany.
They firmly believed that it was the institution of the nation state that had caused those wars. They also believed that Hitler, Mussolini and other dictators had come to power because the uneducated (as they saw it) mass of the population had been given power through democracy. Their answer was to establish an international institution that would override the nation states and to organise it in such a fashion that it would not be democratically accountable, but would be run by a self-selecting oligarchy of well-educated bureaucrats. Themselves. They live in the past, but cannot see the present still less the future.
This way of thinking seems very strange to us in Britain. Our experience of the nation state has been positive. It is the nation state that has allowed us to develop economically, politically and socially. We see it as a good thing. Likewise we think democracy is a good thing. We believe that only by holding the state to account through the ballot box will we ensure that the government generally does the right thing untainted by corruption or injustice. Things are not perfect, but on the whole we see a democratic nation state as the best arrangement.
Not so those who set up the EEC, the EU as it has become. Of course they realised that to achieve their aim for the good of the people, those same people must be misled. They knew that the ‘uneducated masses’ would not give up democratic power. So bit by bit powers have been removed from national governments and pulled to the centre in Brussels. Very often the powers are exercised through national governments, but they can do only what they are instructed to do by the EU centre. The nation states still exist in name, but not in any meaningful reality.
The EU institutions that govern this incipient superstate are deliberately undemocratic. The EU Commission is, in effect, the EU government. It meets in secret, conducts its business in secret and keeps all its workings secret. The EU Council acts as a sort of senate. It is made up of all the prime ministers of the member states. In theory the Council holds the Commission to account on behalf of the peoples of Europe. But like the Commission it meets in secret.
The EU Parliament is presented by the EU as being the democratic forum for the people of Europe. Sadly it falls far short of this ideal – and I speak as a candidate to that august body. For a start it does not have anything like the powers needed by a Parliament. It is more akin to a toothless revising chamber. In theory the EU Parliament has some impressive powers, but in practice business is managed by the elites so that it never has the chance to exercise them. That is one reason why it is essential that the Conservative MEPs leave the EPP grouping which restricts their actions so severely – as David Cameron has promised.
This might be all well and good for those European countries willing to go along with it. Many have been through revolutions and upheavals beyond imagining in the past century, making the stability offered by the EU
|  |
close
Video Box
Daniel Hannan - Terminator, Dr. Suess, and Gordon Brown
Having AutoPlay on gives you the best media experience on Bebo. When you visit another user's profile, their Video Box will automatically start playing their current favorite video.
You can change your account settings at anytime here: account settings
|
A very very rough impression of a speedbird
Jamie H 0 ReplysSunday, May 24 2009
Henri 0 ReplysDavid Cameron has announced that he will reopen the Conservative parliamentary candidates list.
In an interview on the Andrew Marr show, David said he wanted to “open up the talent that is available in Parliament".
And he urged people to apply for our candidates list...