The death of the political establishment

A Labour safe seat since 1974 has been transformed into RESPECT heartland, with a majority of 10,000; and many have made several allegations of sectarianism and pandering to religion, instead of local issues, to justify the victory. The turnout was enormous for a by-election, with the poorest wards experiencing extraordinary turnout. Unsurprisingly, mainstream parties have been speculating on the reasons behind one of the greatest by-election shocks in British political history.

What happened in Bradford West?

Well, firstly, RESPECT canvassed the poorer wards with machine-esque precision. Galloway literally knocked on every door in the poorest areas of Bradford West and we have to speculate whether or not the mainstream parties did the same. The sense of abandonment and isolation within these areas are extreme and RESPECT are probably the first political party this socio-economic group has ever encountered.

The Tories, Liberal Democrats and Labour are unable to appeal, or attract, the anti-establishment block because, of course, they are the establishment. The Greens have steadily been constructing a coalition at local level, especially in Brighton, which has helped to present themselves as an alternative to the status quo. UKIP have achieved the same feat at European level, but are-currently-incapable of producing similar domestic achievements; Welsh and Scottish nationalists have managed to break the traditional parties, too. In reality, Bradford West should not been seen as this  revolutionary act; it is a symptom of a wider transformation in British politics.

The ‘big three’ are dying.

The break up of Labour and the Conservatives are inevitable, along with the demise of the Liberal Democrats. This ‘new politics’ is nothing but a continuation of the previous administration; parties and politicians change, but the policies seem to remain the same. Government, taxes, spending are too big and still growing; the state is still feeding away, whilst the rest of society find their rights and wealth depleted by an obsessive centralised system.

If UKIP, Greens and others adopt the RESPECT campaigning style and engage with the most neglected wards within the UK, then we can expect a massive rebellion against the status quo at the local elections.

Read Full Post »

#HelpYourBritain – Too lib·er·al [adj.] supporting Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance

I am proud to announce that we, at Too lib·er·al [adj.], are proudly supporting #HelpYourBritain and handing over the blog to Kent, Surrey and Sussex Air Ambulance trust for the day. To keep Air Ambulance operating, the group depend entirely on donations and-to my surprise-receive no lottery funding at all.

Bing are using their homepage to increase awareness for five charities across the United Kingdom; and I was invited to help share and promote the campaign with my readers, especially the Air Ambulance operator which is a local charity and provides a fantastic service to Kent.

Please, if you can, donate as a little as £5 to this wonderful cause and help to keep this vital service in operation.

Read Full Post »

#HelpYourBritain – Kent Surrey and Sussex Air Ambulance Trust

Microsoft’s search engine, Bing.com, is today handing over its daily homepage to the Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance Trust, enabling the independent, life-saving charity to tell its story to Bing’s 11 million UK users. An exclusive image that celebrates Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance’s work, as well as providing in-depth information about the charity and the valuable work it does. The Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance Trust was chosen by the British public as part of Bing’s ongoing Help Your Britain campaign, which features a different user-nominated charity on the homepage on the final Friday each month.

Run almost entirely on voluntary donations, the charity provides a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) to people living and working in the Kent, Surrey and Sussex counties, attending to victims of life threatening accidents, medical conditions or illnesses. With the air ambulance responding to 4-6 medical emergencies every day, 365 days a year, the charity can reach any location within the Kent, Surrey and Sussex area within 20 minutes, significantly reducing the chances of fatality or serious physical disability.

Hot spots on the homepage will provide users with additional information about the challenges that Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance faces through its life-saving work. Users can also watch an in-depth video (www.bing.com/helpyourbritain) featuring members of the air ambulance’s team to find out more information about the charity, including details of how they can make a donation, by visiting Bing’s Help Your Britain page.

Adrian Bell, CEO, Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance, commented: “Most people are aware of the vital work that Air Ambulance services in England and Wales carry out in dealing with major medical trauma. However not everyone knows that Air Ambulances in England and Wales are charities. The Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance does not receive any statutory government funding and relies almost entirely on donations. Our fuel costs are a significant part of the charity’s expenditure and currently there is no exemption on vat on fuel for Air Ambulances. Conversely we understand that the RNLI has been exempt from paying this charge since 1977 and we would appreciate Air Ambulances being treated in a similar fashion when undertaking life-saving missions.”

Peter Maxmin from Bing says: “The life-saving work that the Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance undertake is truly phenomenal but it’s sadly made difficult due to limited funding, which is why we’re delighted to be showcasing the charity as part of Bing’s Help Your Britain campaign.

“The Kent, Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance is the second user nominated charity to feature as part of Bing’s ongoing Help Your Britain campaign, and follows an encouraging level of interest from our users, all nominating charities that are close to their hearts that are making incredibly valuable contributions to communities across Britain.

“There are more than 187,000 registered charities across Great Britain with a story to be told, many of which will never be heard due to the lack of resources at their disposal. Bing is shining the spotlight on these unsung British heroes, enabling the British public to nominate the charities they would like to see featured on the homepage via www.bing.com/HelpYourBritain.”

Read Full Post »

Are you kidding me?! Peer let off repaying £4,000

A peer is being let off repaying more than £4,000 in expenses that she was found to have misclaimed.

The Commons Commission has signaled that Baroness Adams’s disputed debt will be written off because it is too difficult to make her hand the money back.

This story caused a significant reaction, which has almost resulted in me registering for anger management classes. If I am ever unfortunate to encounter debt problems, I shall invoke the Baroness Adam’s defence and claim it is “too difficult” to pay the outstanding money back.

Somehow, though, I doubt any court will accept that as an acceptable defence.

Read Full Post »

My contribution for Catch 21: IMF reform

I had the wonderful pleasure of working with Catch 21 Productions, recently, on discussing the future of the global economy. Preliminary, I focused on the IMF and how it could (and most likely will be) transformed into a global central bank. Here is brief look;

IMF intervention is much more common in the post-crash global economy, with its role become more or less that of a global central bank. Yet, it lacks the credible reforms to achieve such status; the transition towards a global central bank has begun. Globalisation requires a stronger, more robust and vibrant monetary system, which is independently financed and has the necessary administrative skills to stabilise global markets.

Please visit Catch 21 for the full essay.

Read Full Post »

A strange announcement from the all-party Christians

Gary Streeter (Con), Gavin Shuker (Lab) and Tim Farron (Lib Dem) have provided me with some entertainment this afternoon; good old Christianity desires more inferring with our political system (again);

We are writing on behalf of the all-party Christians in Parliament group in Westminster and your ruling that the Healing On The Streets ministry in Bath are no longer able to claim, in their advertising, that God can heal people from medical conditions.

It appears to cut across two thousand years of Christian tradition and the very clear teaching in the Bible.

Yes. You read that correctly; the all-party Christians believe God can cure medical conditions. Like me, you are probably speculating why there are so many sick people in the world, that a so called benevolent creator apparently chooses not to cure. Whilst we pontificate on this philosophical and moral question, it would be nice if the Christians in Parliament did, you know, their job.

God’s place is the church and not the legislative branch of government.

I’m quite familiar with Healing On The Streets, who routinely parade the streets of Canterbury. Freedom of religion is a right and worshipers are entitled to participate; I have no intention of advocating a ban because it violates my liberal attitudes. However, advertising that God can cure a medical condition is wrong – this claim lacks any basic scientific evidence. The belief in a deity can provide emotional support and comfort, but it cannot cure you. That’s why we have a health system in the United Kingdom; doctors are hired to provide treatment, not the minister from the local church.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and spiritual intervention in medical cases are a fine example. People who are sick and require medical treatment should see a doctor, not God.

Read Full Post »

Reforming political parties: Transparency is the word.

US Republican Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, at a fund raising event. Like the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition, Romney enjoys dinner with potential donors – yet, as we can see from the picture, the Americans wine and dine in public. Presidential candidates are not only expected to raise funds on their own, but the American voters expects them to do it in public and not in private; Mitt Romney, and others, will attend mass public and social events-in person-to ask for financial contributions.

Imagine how better our democracy would be, if party leaders were selected by an open primary and not just party members. Ed Miliband recommended it and, ironically, was blocked by his own big donors – the unions.

Democrats and Republicans have network of supporters and individual donors, some of which are corporations, unions and wealthy individuals. The list of names is in the public domain and can be accessed by the media and voters; the system might be imperfect and still vulnerable to corruption, but at least it is transparent.

None of us know which union leader routinely meets Ed Miliband and discusses internal party policy, only occasional mentions appear in the British press with a threat to withhold donations if “Ed doesn’t do as he’s told”. The President of the United States, on the other hand, has a wonderful Press Secretary who will tell reporters when the union bosses are arriving and allow a brief discussion with the press core; in which they will openly allude to the subject matter of any talks with the President.

And this is the beauty of the American democracy; politicians are encouraged to disclose donations, meetings and actually meet potential voters in order to be elected to office. Open primaries ensure a candidate is not parachuted in and guaranteed an almost certain election; these potential politicians have to knock on doors, collect donations themselves and talk to the electorate.

Imagine a world, in which your MP, had to not only hold a public fund raising event, but encourage voters to donation to their campaigned based on their policies. This candidate would not have been selected by party HQ, but via an open primary of registered supporters. True democracy. Currently, this does not happen. Political parties only remember we’re a democracy every time an election is taking place. Once the ballot box is closed, we’re ignored.

To quote Paine, the House of Commons is “the only republican element of the constitution“, it belongs to you and I – not the politicians, corporations and unions.

Read Full Post »

New budget, same old arguments

Chuka Umunna tweeted;

“if we were delivering a budget tmr we’d reverse it. Explain why r u taking an av. of £83 p.a from 4.4 million pensioners?“

Easy. That £83 p.a is paying for lifting two million ordinary low and middle income earners out of tax. Are Labour party honestly protesting against it? We are talking about middle class pensioners, and many will question why younger workers are financing benefits-such as winter fuel and TV license-for middle and upper class retired individuals.

The entitlement debate is long overdue in this country; especially towards wealthy and retired pensioners. We cannot expect a minimum wage shelf stacker to pay for those, who can afford to provide for themselves. Labour still believe in universal benefits, even though their own voters despise the notion of defending Child Benefit for families earning over £60,000.

In reality, nothing has changed. The arguments are still the same; Labour still condemning bankers, the 1% and happily desiring to provide benefits for the 15%; at the same time, refuse to acknowledge the millions of people being lifted out of income tax. Yesterday, the party held four different positions on the top rate – against the cut, maybe against it, might reintroduce it, probably won’t.

Unsurprisingly, broadcasters were getting a tad annoyed and want to find out the alternative. Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition responded with “we don’t know” and “cannot promise everything”. Brilliant, just brilliant.

24 million people were given a tax cut yesterday, but the opposition would rather talk about middle class pensioners, families with £60+ and a few rich people. Nothing has changed.

Oh, and the public still blame them for the cuts….

Read Full Post »

2012: The death of the traditional left

In the 1980s, the left lost the argument on the economy; it resorted to vituperative, belligerent language and  mass hysteria to denounce Margaret Thatcher’s economic reform. The Labour party opposed, outright, any tax cut and privatisation that occurred throughout the period.  People embraced the idea of ownership democracy, popular capitalism and the expansion of credit; we all had a chance to achieve our aspirations and dreams, yet the left predicted catastrophe.

It never happened. The country become one of the richest and the centre of global finance in the world. In 1994, under the guiding hand of Tony Blair, Labour embraced markets and the private sector. The left lost. And, in 2012, they’re losing again, but this time on social policy.

Workfare, welfare, education and health reforms have all been opposed by the left, post-May 2010. scaremongering and mass hysteria has returned to the front of all arguments on the left; apparently, the NHS will be abolished, but my GP has ensured me I do not require a credit card or any other form of payments for my appointment on Monday. The NHS is, and still will be, free and universal. Yet Andy Burnham persists with utter lies and union-esque hyperbole; his behaviour and hypocrisy helped to ensure the safe passage of this bill.

And the left wonders why the Tories have taken the lead in the recent ICM poll and Cameron’s own approval rating is 42%, with a personal 17 point lead over Ed Miliband (on ‘who makes the best Prime Minister). Labour are not trying to fight the 2010 election again, they’re fighting the 1983 election. With similar tactics.

Scotland is a warning to the Labour party, a warning of what happens when a party panders to its most deepest core vote and assumes the country will vote for them; sheer toxic arrogance. Officials within Scottish Labour refused to acknowledge the personal ratings of Alex Salmond and his capability as First Minister; even after the SNP gained a majority under a supposed anti-majority electoral system, Labour still refuse to acknowledge the First Minister.

Tories, Liberal Democrats and the SNP are all in government, passing reforms and changing the country. Labour have drifted to the far left, marching with the SWP and the Communist Party in opposing every cut and reform; Ed Miliband’s strategy is nothing less than a non-occupation UKUncut equivalent, with placards and banners which no one is reading or taking any notice.

In reality, the left are not really providing an alternative – they’re digging a grave, a very deep grave.

Read Full Post »

So, I’m now an independent wondering what will happen next…

Nearly a week on from my departure from the Liberal Democrats, I’m adjusting to the life of a political independent; which, I must confess, is rather comfortable and quite liberating. The whole NHS debate was intoxicating (in a negative way) to the point I considered abandoning my Twitter account, due to several skirmishes and outbreaks of war on my time line. It was a little tedious, I have to say..

Over the weekend, I’ve had several messages of support, sympathy and congratulations (thank you to my Tory followers); predominate question was whether or not I would ever align myself to another party, or rejoin the Liberal Democrats. Across the weeks and months you might see opinions and editorials on different outlets, which I have never contributed to before; don’t assume new affiliation, in the political sense. Just expanding my audience.

Any announcement, on new political affiliation, would occur on this blog first. It is something I have not really given much thought to throughout the last week; there has been offers, but I’m currently not entertaining anything just yet. Probably will participate in certain campaigns and endorse individual candidates (I am open to offers).

But the big question I was asked by numerous people: will I rejoin the Liberal Democrats? honestly, I don’t think so. I shall not give a reason why, but party members must look at the inner details of the polls; specifically voting patterns among Liberal Democrat voters. Forget the leadership, overall party support and dare I say the membership – focus primarily on the changing attitudes of voters in general and, fundamentally, your own voters. It is the key to survival. That’s all I will say.

I’m still available on Twitter (@danielfurruk) and via e-mail (danielfurr at gmail.com) for any questions, etc.

Read Full Post »