Op-Ed: As UK PM David Cameron announced the date of the upcoming 2016 EU referendum, June 23, 2016, it was all 'jolly good show' and ‘all pals together’ but that did not last long. The Tory government boss David Cameron and his senior ministers tried to say the party remained united, best of friends and so much more and would not fall into the trap of publicly arguing over the EU issue but the cracks soon started to show. Tory MPs are allowed a free run in the EU referendum campaign, at least up to a point. There is no whip telling them how they should campaign and which side of the fence to jump. This has led to serious divisions in the Conservative party and to fairly equally matched in and out campaigns by senior figures. If it was a popularity contest and you were a Tory party supporter Cameron’s better in Europe campaign would have to be your choice. The better out campaign has the likes of Boris Johnson, Iain Duncan Smith and Priti Patel trying to persuade the electorate to leave the EU. Of course if you are a Tory fan you may not see that group of individuals as vile; if you are not you may. There seems to be a conspiracy theory for almost each and every action in the 21st Century and there are a few surrounding the UK EU in /out referendum. One claims that the EU out Tory campaign is full of their most hated MPs to encourage the electorate to vote for the country to remain an EU member; another theory hints that the people of Scotland will vote to leave the EU simply to force a second Scottish Independence referendum. But however the Tories try to spin or buy the news there is no Tory party unity over the EU. The referendum is making for strange political affiliations such as George Galloway and Nigel Farage sharing a campaign platform. There are some breakaway Labour groups campaigning to leave the EU but the party has taken a firm stance and is campaigning for the UK to stay an EU member country. As the Tories straddle the fence with two semi-official campaigns running alongside each other unity has left the building. DWP boss Iain Duncan Smith has accused Cameron of being pessimistic over a UK future outside of the EU and having a ‘low opinion of the British people’. Various Tory ministers are making statements to the mainstream media which illustrate that the party is as expected at odds over the EU. Some MPs and voters will not be happy with Cameron’s renegotiated terms as they do not go far enough but others are long time Eurosceptics who simply want the country to leave the EU. Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party have said they will not share a platform with Cameron’s better in campaign and that is a wise move. Cameron promised the referendum to shore up his political party not for any unselfish reasons. He has made his bed and must lie on it. But apart from that Labour are campaigning for the EU to stay as part of the EU on a very different mandate. This time the Tory party must sort its own dirty laundry and in public; the knives are out. More at: Metro - EU referendum: Shadow business secretary Angela Eagle says Labour is not split on EU but the Conservatives are in "meltdown" New Statesman - the Tory split that Labour craved has arrived – but the party can't exploit it
2 Comments
Op-Ed: So you are a brand spanking new MP entering the Houses of Parliament for the first time. If you are dressed for the part, although clothing should not matter, would you expect to be challenged for opting to ride in the Member's only lift? You may of course expect that someone somewhere in the building would check your ID but by the time you get to the lift that business will surely be over and done with? But how about if a member assumes you are a cleaner and not an MP? Now why would they draw such a conclusion? If someone has and you are young, female and black the conclusion for most of is that you have encountered parliamentary racism. Sunday the Daily Mirror reports "A black MP today revealed how she suffered racism in parliament after a fellow MP thought she must have been a cleaner. Labour’s Dawn Butler recalled the incident which took place in a Members'-only lift at the Palace of Westminster. Asked on BBC Five Live’s Piennar’s Politics if she had ever experienced racism in parliament, the Brent Central MP replied: “Yes - God, there are so many incidents. “There was a time when I was in the lift. It was a Members’ lift that Members of Parliament use specially in cases we have [to] get to places quickly. “I was in the lift and some other MP said, ‘This lift really isn’t for cleaners’." She has gallantly refused to name the MP though that leaves a nagging doubt that it could be a member of her own political party. But in 2008 Dawn named and surely shamed David Heathcote-Amory, Tory, in an article after he had confronted her as she went to sit in the Members’ section on the terrace. "“He actually said to me, ‘What are you doing here? This is for Members only’,” she wrote. “He then proceeded to ask me, 'Are you a member?' And I said, ‘Yes I am, are you?‘ And he turned around and said to his colleague, ‘They’re letting anybody in nowadays.’" While such blatantly ignorant words could be down to many things including racism sexism and even snobbery the final section of the Daily Mirror report leaves this writer in no mind about this particular incident. "“It is quite absurd,” he was quoted as saying. “What she is actually objecting to is that I didn’t recognise her as a new MP. “I simply asked her what she was doing at that end of the terrace, and they are quite sensitive about this kind of thing, they think that any kind of reprimand from anyone is racially motivated"." THEY just who are THEY Mr David Heathcote-Amory? That defines his manner and demeanour as racist without the shadow of a doubt. Who is David Heathcote-Amory? In May 2009 the Daily Telegraph reported "David Heathcoat-Amory’s gardener used hundreds of sacks of horse manure and the MP submitted the receipts to Parliament." The report also said "Since 2004, Mr Heathcoat-Amory, the MP for Wells, Somerset, has claimed thousands of pounds to maintain his garden, including services like mowing and watering." He paid back "almost £30,000 following the House of Commons expenses audit." But unlike some Labour MPs who were tried and jailed he kept his job. Wikipedia describes him as “a British politician, accountant and farmer. He was the Conservative Member of Parliament for Wells from 1983 until he lost the seat in the 2010 general election. He became a member of the British Privy Council in 1996. [If I was a visitor to the Commons and spoken to in such a way I would draw my own conclusions about parliament and its members and be inclined to think that at least some MPs do not represent the people ever] Opinion: The Tory onslaught on the poorest and most vulnerable people in Britain continues and if you believe it is based on austerity measures you are mistaken. These cuts are about fulfilling a Tory agenda, one that helps the rich get richer, shores up the establishment and outs we the little people back in what they view as our place. Last week a majority of MPs voted to scrap a £30 a week ESA payment which was created to help people with disabilities try to return to the workplace and offer financial support. But that cut must not be considered in isolation as the entitlements that are being scrapped are many. On it goes in relentless fashion with DWP boss Iain Duncan Smith and sidekick Priti Patel spending a small fortune to implement damaging cuts. The debate and votes on the work and welfare bill last Tuesday had more than a touch of Groundhog Day. The bill was sent back to the Commons for further debate after the House of Lords refused to simply rubber stamp the cuts. This has not led to a period of soul searching by the Tories but rather a commitment to appoint more right-wing Lords and Ladies who will agree to push on with the party's damaging Social Security cuts, rebranding and reforms. The cost of buying votes in this way is not cheap, nor probably cost-effective, but it does help the Tory party push forward their vision of England in the 21st Century. In early February BBC News reported "Nearly 14,000 disabled people who rely on a specialist motoring allowance have had their cars taken away from them following government welfare changes. Figures seen by the BBC show almost half of those having to be reassessed for this support under the changes lost their Motability vehicle. Many had been adapted to meet their owners' needs and campaigners warn it could lead to a loss of independence. But the government says the new process is fairer and people can appeal." But of course following the 2015 General Election defeat that party under the temporary leadership of Harriet Harman let the Tories get a firm footing back in July 2015. At that time the Independent wrote "The Government's bill that will cut spending on welfare by £12 billion has been passed in the House of Commons, with 308 votes to 124.Despite 48 out of 216 Labour MPs going against the whip and voting against the bill, far more abstained, letting the bill pass with a large majority. Abstainers include many contenders for the Labour leadership, including Andy Burnham. However, he did vote for a Labour amendment which came just before the main vote, which said the Government's bill should not get a second reading. This vote was defeated, by 308 votes against 208.Leadership contender Jeremy Corbyn was the only candidate to vote against the bill, going against the whip's instructions. The other potential leaders, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, both abstained - although all are believed to have voted for the defeated Labour amendment." Little wonder then that support for Jeremy Corbyn continues to sky rocket. Harman was of course in a damned if I do damned if I do not position and misguidedly believed whipping MPS to support the bill but try for an amendment would somehow show the party as electable but it did not. It spectacularly backfired but was too late to make an election difference nationally. It was however one more reason people voted Jeremy Corbyn to lead the party as after all England does not need another middle-of-the-road, centric or right-wing party it needs a party that is comfortable owning the left-wing of the political spectrum. As the Tory axe gets into overdrive again, probably following the March budget, there are many things we all should consider. Cameron promised to triple-lock entitlements for pensioners in the UK but only until 2020. He may yet have to break that promise but if he does not the so-called grey brigade, which includes this writer, should not be complacent. By 2020, Cameron will have stepped down as Tory party leader, boundary changes which are coming into effect will have redrawn the political landscape of England and the UK and in doing so strengthened Tory election hopes while weakening that for other parties including Labour, the number of older citizens in the UK will have also grown but people will not be able to retire until older unless they have an independent income, so overall the one-party-state will be well on its way. In other words your vote in 2020 will have been weakened unless we fight back now. There has never been a more important time for Labour supporters to unify and the conclusion made when some do not is that they prefer a self-serving route. The media makes much of Corbyn’s record as a backbencher of not obeying the party whip and voting with his heart and conscience but is that so bad. Check out his voting record here. Note from above text “This vote was defeated, by 308 votes against 208. Leadership contender Jeremy Corbyn was the only candidate to vote against the bill, going against the whip's instructions.” Like me you may admire him for that. More at: Disabilty Rights UK and members respond to Commons defeat of Lords amendments last week which begins by saying "Liz Sayce DR UK CEO says: "There is no evidence that the £30 a week paid to disabled people in the work related activity group acts as a disincentive to work. Instead, all the evidence from a recent Parliamentary review finds that the cut will make it difficult for disabled people to be able to afford to take part in things like training and work experience. It will also lead to disabled people struggling to pay food and heating bills which will have a damaging impact on their physical and mental health. Op-Ed: In this final part of our look back at the role of speaker of the House of Commons in the 21st Century we ask John Bercow, what went wrong? There was a time when Bercow managed to provide some fun and humour into House of Common's debate while keeping good order and basically doing his job. Those days are gone. Some will say they noticed a remarkable downward trend following Jeremy Corbyn becoming the elected Labour party leader, the party that is the official opposition party in the House of Commons. From day one when Corbyn got to his feet, announced by the speaker as Mr Jeremy Corbyn, you could hear that hint of distaste in his voice. And sadly most people who tune into debates which involve Mr Corbyn will have noticed bullyboy tactics from the Tory benches and the speaker in an apparent daze of deafness. After PMQS Wednesday February 24 reached a new low many people were moved to write in to the speaker's office and complain. They received a pretty bog-standard reply from a member of the speaker's secretarial and admin team that was viewed as a brush-off. The personal attack on Mr Corbyn by Cameron who, in response to a Labour backbench jibe, said "Ask my mother? I think I know what my mother would say."I think she would look across the despatch box and she would say 'Put on a proper suit, do up your tie and sing the national anthem'" may have appealed to Tory backbenchers but looked silly, petulant and childish to the rest of us. Social media responded angrily but Mr Corbyn with a wry smile joked to Sky News Thursday about doing his tie up for the Prime Minister. But as Mr Corbyn is almost 30-years older than Mr Cameron it was contemptible Tory whippersnappers may have loved Cameron's bite back but in the end he was left with egg on his face. But where was Mr Bercow in all of this? Hardly doing his job? According to Parliament UK "The salary of the Speaker is £150,236 (this figure comprises of MP's salary of £74,000 and the additional salary for the Speaker of £76,236)." It is about time he earned that money. In late March as parliament was set to break ahead of the May General election a Tory plot to oust Bercow was launched by William Hague. It ended up as a filibuster that prevented the House debating a "Mayfair Tax loophole." Labour ministers technically ran to the aid of Bercow but was he part of the plot we wonder? If not did that plot leave him fearing his place in the Commons was under attack? Whatever the reason Bercow is helping Cameron's Bullingdon Boys turn the Commons into comedy theatre. Perhaps he likes his cosy position and will do anything to prevent real political change? This is a four part mini series; House of Commons speaker, part one When John Bercow did his job, part two Expenses scandal hits the speaker, part three Op-Ed: Michael Martin, the role of speaker and British politics when it became embroiled in scandals in 2008 / 2009. Background The credibility of British Parliament and its ministers took a battering when the expenses scandal broke. Members of Parliament elected by the people in order to form a government and fill the Commons had been up to no good. It may be debatable just how honest and trustworthy politicians are at the best of times, but in 2008/2009 they seemed to have excelled themselves in greed and stupidity. Revelations made public in the Daily Telegraph and then splashed all over the press, and around the world, made the UK, its leaders and its people look a mixture of the greedy and the stupid. Working within what politicians viewed as the law and the rules some busily helped themselves to vast amounts of money out of the public coffers. The politicians involved saw all of this as acceptable because it was within the rules, sort of. Of course, some individuals only claimed a little more than is reasonable but the total amount of cash involved was disastrous, especially in PR terms, and reduced confidence in the political system to a new low; most of the electorate had experienced a drop in disposable income and were understandably angry. Those that were involved in this scandal basically fiddled their expense claims. Politicians may have believed they acted within what the law allowed but most people could see they had done wrong. At that time rules that applied to parliamentary expenses which were available so that MP's could claim for second homes when necessary were used and abused. This entitlement exists solely for the purpose of assisting Members of Parliament who may have a constituency at one end of the country, miles away from London. This allowance offers assistance towards the upkeep of one of these homes, namely the one that was purchased or rented as a second home As a second home, and in all intents and purposes a crash pad, the accommodation should only be basic but as we learned some MP's were living the high life and not just crashing down. How long had this been going on? It is hard to guess how long such expenses claims were claimed and paid out. It is also hard pinpointing who was dishonest and who was honest but it is difficult to believe that such fiddling of expenses is a recent occurrence. Conservative members of parliament often have good incomes apart from their salaries for being an MP. In some ways such politicians would not really have a need to over claim their expenses. You could say that some of the more ordinary politicians probably have less overall income. WELL TOUGH. That is often the way the cookie crumbles. It is just the same with an ordinary 9 - 5 job. Some colleagues may be worse off than others as they have lots of children and a partner who does not or cannot work. In the same way some colleagues could have a partner who has his or her own business and plenty wealth. If investigators were to look into politician’s expense claims in the UK over the last 50 years I wonder what skeletons they would discover. My gut instinct is that this twisting of a legal loophole, which enabled politicians in the UK to work the system, has probably gone on for a long time. In fact for far too long. Where do they go from here? The position of the Speaker of the House of Commons, Michael Martin, became untenable and he was forced to resign over this scandal. The Speaker is a privileged position and wields much power. Michael Martin, the Speaker, became the first Speaker to resign in 300 years and so made history, albeit in a rather notorious way. Previous Speaker scandals include:- Sir John Trevor who was kicked out of office in 1695 after the House of Commons found him guilty of "a high crime and misdemeanour" for accepting a bribe. The City of London asked Sir John if he could put through a bill on their behalf, and he agreed to do it for 1,000 guineas. This was discovered and efforts were launched to remove him from the speaker-ship for bribery. Prior 1560, seven speakers were beheaded and one was murdered. On 1642, Speaker William Lenthall famously put the interests of the Commons to the fore. This was when Charles I entered the House to arrest five members for high treason. When he asked the speaker if he knew where these members were, the speaker famously replied: "May it please your majesty, I have neither eyes to see, nor tongue to speak in this place, but as the House is pleased to direct me." Whenever a new speaker is chosen, he makes a show of reluctance to accept the job and has to be dragged to the chair by his supporters. This is because of the dire fate that has befallen some speakers down the centuries. A small sample of the claims in question; The Telegraph stated:- Meanwhile, in the latest disclosure over MPs' expenses, the Daily Telegraph reported the Labour MP John Austin claimed more than £10,000 for the redecoration of his London flat – which was just 11 miles from his main home – before selling for a profit. The newspaper reported on its website that the left-wing MP for Erith and Thamesmead had made £30,000 when he sold the flat in Southwark, south London, in 2006. It said that he then bought a new flat just 1.5 miles away, claiming £10,000 in stamp duty and other expenses incurred in the move and a further £15,000 on a new bathroom, kitchen, carpets, and appliances. But the timing of the revelations indicated it was more of a political exercise than wanting to stop the rot. Many in the country were disillusioned with New Labour and PM Gordon Brown. David Cameron, leader of the Tory Party spotted a change in the wind and opportunities were seized. For those wanting to see an end to Gordon Brown's Labour Party the expenses scandal was manna from heaven. The buck stopped with Gordon and the scandal helped elect a Tory Lib Dem coalition government in 2010. Times were tough and money tight as the UK struggled to move on from the global economic crisis of 2008 and the scandal rolled on. Tory MP Julie Kirkbride faced with allegations of fiddling bottled it and instead of attending an open meeting at her constituency informed the press that she would stand down at the next election. Mrs Kirkbride said she had acted within the rules highlighting the problem when we have some greedy politicians with few scruples. With ambiguous rules there is always the opportunity for chancers to play the system and give Parliament a bad name. And though publications like the Telegraph tried to concentrate on Labour party fiddles there were plenty of Tories caught up in the scandal. Ahead of the election more Labour resignations helped seal the political fate of Gordon Brown. Labour MP Hazel Blears timed her resignation to do maximum damage to Brown and it did with a well timed act of revenge as payback for the public slating she took from Gordon Brown, regarding her suspect expense claims. Yet back in government first in coalition and now with a majority of 12 the Conservative party have been able to survive more expense scandals with at least one of the accused, Maria Miller, still sitting in the Commons. Remembering Maria Miller expense scandal This is a four-part mini series; House of Commons speaker, part one When John Bercow did his job, part two John Bercow House of Commons speaker, part four Op-Ed: Originally written in May 2012 it seems little has changed in the House of Commons for the better when you consider the role of Speaker. That office has associated support including deputy speakers but is supposed to offer an unbiased role that is cross-party. In 2012 we wrote; ""Slapped wrists" for PM Cameron UK Parliamentary business at times is reminiscent of kindergarten; tit for tat remarks, honourable members flouncing out, tipsy politicians having enjoyed the benefits of the Commons bar then acting in a thuggish manner and more. It can be entertaining to watch but often it is embarrassing. Once it was decided that cameras would be placed in the Commons it was generally though standards would improve. If they have then heaven only knows what they were like before. Keeping order over the honourable ministers is the Speaker of the House of Commons, who school playground and that kiddies rhyme "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" In reality words can be very hurtful. They can also show a lack of respect and damage any working relationship. Of course at times all politicians take a little poetic licence. They do have to carefully make sure however that they don't overstep the mark. When Cameron called Labour Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls an "idiot" it was deemed a step too far. It has been noticeable that when the PM is under pressure or perhaps looks in danger of losing a political argument he becomes irritated. He then name calls, chides, talks down to and snaps. These may be common traits but they are not part of Political Standards in the UK. The PM said idiot, referring to Ed balls and he has since had to apologise. Cameron was giving the Government a virtual pat on the back as he said they had in enterprise zones found, "innovative ways of using our hard-won credibility, which we wouldn't have if we had listened to the muttering idiot opposite me". This is not first attack on Ed Balls; as an old Etonian Cameron should know that this is just "not cricket". Labour responded calling the PM Flashman as an attack on his privileged background. Asked to withdraw the word "idiot" a smiling or should that be smarmy Cameron responded by saying. "I will replace it with 'the man who left us this enormous deficit and this financial crisis'." That old chestnut. Labour had to pick the pieces up after years of mismanagement by the Tories especially those years under Maggie Thatcher and so it seems that each government blames its predecessors. Perhaps in truth none of them are up to the job? In a day for apologies Cameron said sorry to veteran Labour minister Dennis Skinner for past treatment. He could not prevent his sarcasm though saying," he actually believed Mr Skinner was a "tremendous ornament" to Parliament." Well Dodgy Dave you know what they say about sarcasm? It is the lowest form of wit and so presumably is not statesman like? Tweets, condemnations and more have accompanied today's shenanigans but in reality all the British people want is these overpaid louts in Parliament do what they are paid to do. To act as responsible adults, to debate, decide and legislate and quit the theatrics. Vaudeville died many years ago but either that or the great British Farce appears alive and well preforming daily in the Houses of Parliament with a special performance each Wednesday, called PMQs. This is a brief four part report; House of Commons speaker, part one Expenses scandal hits the speaker, part three John Bercow House of Commons speaker, part four Op-ed: If you ever watch events from the British parliament on its designated live BBC TV channel you probably experience a range of emotions including disappointment, anger and despair with the odd giggle thrown in. But it shouldn't be like that should it? The House of Lords was the first of the two houses to get televised with MPs in the Commons resisting until the bitter end. After a series of essentially time wasting debates and votes on the matter finally in 1989 cameras were rolling in the Commons. This followed 22 debates in 11 years about whether or not to let the cameras in. It was still at the experimental stage, with restrictions on close-ups etc., but was finalised in 1990 after it was shown that televising the Commons had increased news coverage. Twenty-six years later the British public and world citizens who opt to tune in watch something somewhere between a Whitehall farce and a drunken vaudeville show and yes there have been accusations that some Ministers enjoy a bit too much hospitality in the parliamentary bars. When you watch PMQs on a Wednesday live from the Commons it is easy to see why some did their best to prevent TV camera crews filming and screening Commons daily events live. But there was a time when at least a pretence of mutual respect prevented the commons turning into a kindergarten for adults or is that looking back through rose-coloured glasses? The last three speakers The last three elections of a new House of Commons Speaker (1992, 2000 and 2009) have all been relatively controversial according to Wikipedia. "Bernard Weatherill had announced his impending retirement a long time before the 1992 general election, leading to a long but suppressed campaign for support. Betty Boothroyd, a Labour MP who had been Deputy Speaker, was known to be extremely interested in becoming the first woman Speaker (and in doing so, finished the chances of fellow Labour MP Harold Walker who had also been Deputy Speaker). The Conservative former Cabinet member Peter Brooke was put forward at a late stage as a candidate. Unlike previous elections, there was an active campaign among Conservative MPs to support Boothroyd and about 70 of them did so, ensuring her election. She was the only speaker elected in the 20th century not to be a member of the governing party at the time of her first election." Boothroyd kept the theatrics in order but at times played to the House. She "announced her retirement shortly before the summer recess in 2000, which left a long time for would-be Speakers to declare their candidature but little opportunity for Members of Parliament to negotiate and decide on who should be chosen." Although some Conservatives felt strongly that the recent alternation between the main parties should be maintained and a Conservative Speaker chosen a lengthy sitting of the House saw Michael Martin, Labour, voted in. Perhaps the 'tory boys' responded well to discipline by Betty Boothroyd as it took them back to their nannies and public school days but since the demise of Martin something rotten has developed in the role of Speaker of the House of Commons? In October 2015 Boothroyd told the right-wing Daily Mail "'My old party is galloping towards the precipice' as she slams the Corbyn faction taking over her beloved Labour...and says Ed Miliband is to blame" perhaps explaining why the Tories loved her so. When John Bercow did his job, part two Expenses scandal hits the speaker, part three John Bercow House of Commons speaker, part four Op-ed: British Chancellor George Osborne in China on another trade mission has delivered a warning to folks back in the UK to expect more cuts in his next budget scheduled for Wednesday March 16, 2016. There are likely to be existing cuts in the pipeline. With each budget some changes are announced for the next financial year or another date in the future and most of the electorate have soon forgotten what may be just around the corner. Last year was a bumper year for Tory budgets; that was at least one "growth industry." When to the surprise of the Tories they won the 2015 general election an emergency budget was quickly scheduled. Friday Osborne told BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg, viewed by many as a Tory mouthpiece, that he may have to make fresh cuts to public spending in the upcoming budget. BBC News reports he told her that "global economic turmoil and slower growth meant "we may need to undertake further reductions”.” Mr Osborne slowed the pace of spending cuts in his November spending review" apparently. That would have been for politically selfish reasons. Osborne along with his cabinet colleagues plays the British public to suit. In the autumn statement he "dramatically ditched controversial plans to raise £4.4billion from tax credits paid to the poorest working families" after a cross party outcry and protests from around the UK about his planned reforms. He also did a U turn on police spending cuts instead making wild promises on the back of terror attacks in France. Osborne claimed he was able to do all of this because of better than expected growth forecasts and higher tax receipts. Now Osborne is citing a shrinking UK economy as reason for further cuts. The talk now is of his rainy day plan even though figures already indicate it is bucketing it down with rain. About a spending plan that is based on what we can afford but will no doubt include hefty military costs due to our involvement in conflicts abroad, lower taxes for the wealthy, less financial help for the poor and vulnerable and Tory party donor payback at the expense of us all. You can read Osborne's exclusive BBC interview here. In that interview Osborne explains the Tory plan, at least in a fashion, and says "So that's what our plan is rooted in and it may require further reductions in spending. I'll address that in the Budget but people should know this of me: I will do what is required to keep our country safe and secure." Please note a few headlines and mainstream media reports:
Little wonder people distrust some politicians and also call the Tories, the Nasty Party. Check out: HS2 now as Osborne hands China the keys to Britain Nothing pretty about Priti Patel as she attacks ESA |
British political scene
The next General Election in the UK may not be scheduled any time soon but the British political landscape is changing. With that in mind this blog will concentrate on the political scene but with a left wing perspective. Opinion pieces and news will bring you the stories that the MSM prefer to ignore. Archives
September 2018
Categories
All
|