New Labour's Child Catchers

The UK Orwellian NewLabour state is desperately rolling out the quite sinister National Children's Database designed to contain details of and track everyone in the UK under 18.

One wonders how long it will be before they decide to keep the details for life...

The alleged reason for it is to enable "more co-ordinated services for children" and of course to ensure none slips through the net like Victoria Cimbie.

It is questionable if such a database would in fact have prevented her death, or that of baby "P", local co-ordination, lower case loads and effective working practices would almost certainly have far more impact and cost far less.

In the same way they try to uses the fear of terrorism to justfy a national ID database. It is well known thatID cards would never have prevented the London Tube suicide bombers. Or those who attempted to bomb busy London clubs and attacked Glasgow Airport.

This governemt though seems to have only one kneejerk reponse, cataloguing, regimentaion and control of the ordinary citizen - and it seems their children too.

It is terrifying to think of the numbers of people who will have access to what should be private details of our children. Will all council employees be vetted in the same way as youth workers? No. The potential vulnerability that access to this data lays children open to is truly concerning.

Then there is the potential to just loose the details releasing them into the public domain.

The way local councils have misused anti terrorist laws gives an indication they are not to be trusted with our children's details, that are effectively also our details. How long before they routinely check them to establish where you live for instance?

Those who take comfort that these are the twilight days of New Labour and hope the scheme will die a death with their electorial demise are probably fooling themselves. Once rolled out could an new incoming governemnet be trusted to remobve such a big state friendly tool of control?

Maybe the economic facts of life might make a difference. The database is currently slated to cost £224 million, as with all such things this will be underestimated by a whole order of magnitude. Perhaps in the end it will prove to be too expensive.

If the cap fits

It’s generally considered a bad sign for democracy - in any country, when it’s government starts having members of the opposition arrested in order to intimidate or to prevent them from exposing it’s incompetence, mistakes, or shenanigans.

We all look on with disapproval at such regimes, and I am sure we can all think of examples in South America, Africa and on our own continent.

Often the population is too supine, or cowed to protest.

I have pointed out on a number of occasions that New-Labour is in the habit of passing draconian legislation with the alleged purpose of combating “terrorism” and “Organised crime”. If anyone raised any concerns over it’s misuse then they are accused of being "soft on crime", etc.

We always hear the lie trotted out, to suppress the natural concerns of those who do care about liberty, that “if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear”. The BBC can usually find a gullible old lady, or bereaved parent, to back the claim up.

Well “anti terror” legislation is actually repeatedly used by the current government and it’s minions to do things like eject elderly party members from party conference who loudly tell one or two home truths too many.

It is used by local officials to spy on large numbers of ordinary members of the public to establish if they are committing such terrorist related offences as fibbing about their addresses on a school application forms, or putting their rubbish out on the wrong day, or over filling their rubbish bins…

Or it seems... if you happen to be a senior opposition member of the shadow cabinet trying to expose New-Labour’s habitual lies and spin, then it is used to arrest and attempt to silence you.

Worse still it tramples on parliamentary privilege.

Not just anti terror legislation was used this time - but elite anti terror officers were used to do the deed too...

One wonders if anyone in government felt now would be an excellent time to bury this particular “bad news”, what with the terrible events that have unfolded in Bombay.

It is a shame the Anti terror officers weren’t devoting themselves to actual anti terror work of some sort. It’s not like the Indian government probably couldn’t do with them looking to see what they can find out here that might possibly be of help.

It is only half tongue in cheek to conjecture how long before they get a trendy uniform redesign, possibly involving lots of black, calf length leather boots… and their own special logo on their collars, or lapels?

It is perhaps as well for Mr clunking fist, Gordon “Stalin” Brown, that the current opposition never used such tactics when he was in opposition, he was very fond of political leaks then and his ministers still are - when it is to his advantage.

Worryingly the senior ranks of the UK’s police seem to have long since been purged of virtually anyone interested in actually trying to keep law and order, or provide the sort of service and presence the public actually want. These days it appears to be largely run by New-Labour apparatchiks and mostly occupied with/driven by directives and policies that are designed to help give the bogus impression the state is meeting it’s targets…

When it isn’t using anti terror legislation in ways it was never intended on the state’s behalf.

One can’t help but wonder - the cynical amoungst us will have noted the outgoing Met Commissioner Ian, Blair has a reputation for being “comfortable” with the New-Labour state and is outgoing because he has been popularly ousted by London’s new Conservative Mayor.

Probably nothing to do with the latest incident though...

It is truly difficult to believe even the most insensitive, incompetent, flatfoot would have blundered in so heavy handily, or even at all, entirely on their own. One would have thought self preservation alone would have made even the brain dead think twice...

One can’t help but think they must have felt their actions would go down well at the highest level. Certainly condemnation of their actions, or Speaker Martins inaction, have been slow in coming from New-Labour’s front bench.

One hopes that complaints will be made against the officers involved for their, quite possibly illegal activity. Behaviour that strikes at the heart of the way, what is left of, our parliamentary democracy functions. They should be suspended pending the outcome of a parliamentary investigation and hopefully disciplined.

I would have thought it was in the country's interest to have things like the fact that the home office were employing illegal immigreants to look after their security, and the incompetence of those who employed them, exposed to parliamentary scrutiny. Rather than allow the home office to use possibly illegal big brother tactics to conceal such things.

This should be part of an MPs job. It is in the public interest. He should not be arrested whan he does it.

Civil wars were fought over this matter in the days when parliament had more intestinal fortitude.

Another day, another New Labour Governemnt Database

The Nanny state, apparently deeply concerned that it is leaving us any privacy at all, is now turning it’s attention to the creation of a newsuper database to record when we make phone calls, or send emails and who to, oh and all the web sites we visit.

Of course this is purely ‘for our own good’, to protect us all from terrorism. That catchall ‘bogeyman’ excuse of the Authoritarian state, ‘protecting the citizen from the terrorist and criminal’. The same citizen that the State will not permit to defend themselves against criminals with the frequently used threat of prosecution hanging over them if they do.

A Home Office spokesman disingenuously attempted to claim that: "Changes to the way we communicate, due particularly to the internet revolution, will increasingly undermine our current capabilities to obtain communications data - essential for counter-terrorism and the investigation of crime - and use it to protect the public.

Now as far as I know it is still possible for the authorities to tap phone conversations and intercept post, within the law. They do not currently have a database of all letters sent and to whom as far as I am aware. Nor have they ever had one.

So when the spokes person claimed:"Losing the ability to use this data would have very serious consequences for law enforcement and intelligence gathering in the UK." it did not follow logically at all.

The simple fact is that the state already has access to this and more, such as emails and web useage if they suspect someone. It is going too far to monitor us all.
And we all know the State can be trusted to look after this information and not loose it on a bus, or sell it, or something.

And we all know just how much the promise of the State is worth when they say they will only use legislation only for the purpose it was framed.

...Or maybe we could ask Islandic banks about how anti terrorism legislation was recently limbered up ready to be used to freeze Islandic funds in the UK. Or how other legislation was used to silence and eject hecklers from a Labour party conference.

UK’Stamp Duty’ suspended for 12 months

Has anyone noticed?

New Labour’s much trumpeted partial holiday on ‘Stamp duty’ (for non UK residents this is a sales tax imposed by the state on house sales) is, if it is of benefit to anyone, mostly likely to be of benefit in the north, which at least historically was demographically more New Labour friendly.

New Labour are talking about a holiday for stamp duty under £175K This should cover quite a few properties for sale in the North and proportionately far less in the South, due to regional differences in house prices. Any figures the Government states one suspects will be 'spun' averages.

Could it be that they calculate they have terminally burned their bridges already with the South, so they want to minimise the coming electoral debacle for at least some of their sitting MPs

House sales depend on chains, with new time buyers going in at the bottom of the market and the others in the chain trading up, How far up the chain will theis make a difference?

Of course if you can't get a mortgage in the first place – and that is the major actual problem with the housing market, mortgages having effectively dried up because of the credit crunch. Then what difference will reducing the sales tax of around £1.7K imposed on a few of the sales make?

And let’s not forget that any improvement in the housing market that may actually be had from this piece of spin will have to be paid for in reverse, at the end of the ‘holiday’ in a year’s time, when ther will be a corresponding rush then a step back down in sales.

New Labour loose deposit in Henly by election

Gordon Brown’s New Labour are clearly as popular as ever.

New Labour actually lost their deposit in the Henley by-election. No wonder they are not willing to stand up to David Davis, they can’t afford to loose another deposit, either financially ;-) judging by the state of their finances, or politically.

Is it possible that the Lib-Dems can usurp their place nationally at the next election as they did at Henley? If I were the Lib-Dem leader Nick Clegg I would beware of anything that sounded like “prepare for government” quite yet.

John Howell the victorious Conservative candidate probably called it accurately when he suggested his overwhelming victory proved voters wanted "a government that is on their side not on their backs."

New-Labour seem incapable of understanding that or if they do incapable of weaning themselves away from their love of patrician, social services mentality, authoritarian control freakery.

Fortunately Gordon probably can’t muster the sort of shock troops Mugabe can and to be honest, for all his failings, he probably never would if he could. Thank goodness.

New-Labour and the Westminster mindset vs Liberty and David Davis

Recently I posted on David Davis’ resignation over the 42 day issue, the erosion of traditional British liberties and civil rights in general.

I asked the question was it him or Westminster that was out of step with the country. The consensus was Westminster was ‘bog chaining’ on parade - well out of step.

Well he has set up a website here. More power to his elbow. Worth a visit.

UK State clampdown on employing illegals

Well New-Labour’s kakistocracy is clamping down on firms that employ those (sub text - nasty foreign spongers) illegal immigrants. They made it illegal to employ illegal immigrants, they prosecuted companies that did and now they are going to pillory the employers by ‘naming and shaming’.

The lie they tell to justify this?

Apparently it’s all to help crush major organised criminal enterprises that use international people trafficing networks to smuggle people into the UK, as a supply of illegal labour. Any way the employers deserve it. They are unscrupulously undercutting the labour market by avoiding paying taxes on wages, that are below the minimum wage anyway. Why, surely virtually stealing jobs from the honest hardworking indigenous population...

...who find they make as money on benefit doing nothing than they could from such jobs as the immegrants are doing.

That’ll help drive up the cost of food and services. Is anyone out there using more than just a single brain cell to parse these excuses?

So we take one step back from the spin and lies.

The real problem is that New-Labour have effectively lost control of the UK’s borders. For years if illegal immigrants decamped from trucks and were caught they would be given instructions to make their way to reception centres and directions, the vast majority of whom promptly vanished. Those that were not caught vanished also.

Rather than have an effective system (this is New Labour here) they persecute hapless lorry drivers and employers, trying to force them to make up for government incompetence and despite a massively ramping tax burden state under funding.

OK. Now lets take another step back. Is there one? Yes.

Why is this a problem? Why are illegal immigrants a problem? Why are they illegal in the first place for that matter?

They claim benefits from a system they never contributed perhaps? Drain the good old NHS of resources when they never paid anything into it? Jump the social housing queue? Etc. etc. etc.

The underlying reason is that in sufficient numbers immigrants are a problem for a ‘cradle to grave’ welfare state, with universal entitlement like the UK’s, designed to run in isolation. Such a system also undeniably makes the UK much more attractive to economic migrants exacerbating the ‘problem’.

Without a welfare state that is constructed in the way the UK’s is immigration would become much less popular. Immigrants would not be a drain on the public purse either. They would either contribute to the economy and stay or not. If not they would not be able to survive here and would leave. If they committed crime then, tried, imprisoned then deported.

All that would be left would be boarder security issues and any social problems left.

Maybe that’s why New-Labour are so keen on the ID card and illegal immigrants (Oh - and of course the ‘War on Terror) will be their excuse to justify it…

What’s wrong with New-Labour

I was listening to some of the spin and damage limitation over New-Labour’s pretty disastrous showings in the local and London mayoral elections on Sky News this morning.

They were speaking to Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, (she of being afraid to walk the streets after dark fame).

She was articulating all the excuses New-Labour seem to be developing while Gordon gets up the courage to show his face in public again and avoids the initial heat. Need to take the lesson on board and listen to the electorate, etc.

Any way she said something cut out of later repeats and I paraphrase as best I recall, about providing the leadership the electorate needed. It struck me as a bit of a Freudian slip. That’s just it – we don’t want to be told what to do by them we want to be left to live our lives in peace the way we wish to.

That is part of the whole problem with New-Labour and their natural bedfellows who seem to populate social services, education and local government, some of the upper echelons of the medical profession, etc. They seem so convinced that they know best and they will damned well force us to follow their will for our own good and we will all be grateful in the end really…

They want to control and regulate us keep record about everything and force us to prove who we are. Watch us all the time, tell us how to raise our children, what we can eat, drink and do in public and private. Make every thing illegal unless they have given specific permission, preferably controlled by expensive permit or licence that we have to pay for.

These are many of the reasons New-Labour did so badly, do they see it? Hell no! It seems the beast will never change.

Gordon’s stealth tax raid on the pensions of the poor

More of the ramifications of Gordon Brown’s infamous final budget slowly sink in. This time it’s the pensions of the less well off that take a pounding.

One wonders why these things only seem to really dawn on people once they are actually happening to them, it would appear that people just don’t have the sense to get out from under a falling piano when they see one. Or simply don’t recognise what they are seeing until it is actually affecting them.

The government is always banging on about the ‘pensions hole’ after Gordon brown personally helped create it with his infamous £5billion-a-year state stealth raid on pensions in 1997 where he abolished tax relief on dividends paid into pension funds.

This lead to the collapse of hundreds of final salary pension schemes and resulted in huge numbers of workers being worst off. It means unless everyone now has to make a bigger contribution or there would be rather less in the pension pot than had been expected - and the state was worried about having to support this, after having caused it.

A bit like spending the rent money on gin and then worrying about the landlord’s knock on the door.

All of this would not be so much of a problem if the state ran an honest pension scheme, with real money in it, that the contributions were actually invested in - but no they have a system where those who pay taxes have to cover the cost of pension contributions out of their taxes, less workforce, less tax.

When Gordon brown combined the bands that applied to the lowest paid, the lowest tax bands from 10% and 22% both to 20% it affected the amount of tax relief on low paid pensions in some cases dropping it This means that any of the poor who actually gained anything out of the change to 20% who was investing say £200 a month now has to cough up almost £50 a year more (£48) just to avoid loosing ground on their pension pot.

So if Gordon Brown, or any of his NL cronies wants to shake your hand on the run up to the Local elections, keep your other hand on your wallet and check you still have your watch afterwards and if they tell you they care about the poor and lower paid remember pension contributions and the abolition of the 10% rate that has not gone away, despite the spin.

How the mind set behind the New-Labour project stifles dissent.

This is an interesting post. I recommend you read it all.

For me the sentence: “The solution is to create an ethic according to which any deviation from the consensus is treated as opposition to 'egalitarianism', to 'progress', and to 'fairness'.” said it all.

Just about a perfect summation of the UK’s New-Labour and their cheerleading ‘Islington Tendency’s’ modus operandi.

A short comment on Mme Sarkozy and ‘that’ picture

The Sarkozys are on a state visit to the UK. President Sarkozy really seems to be looking to improve/upgrade the relationship between the UK and France. He looked smart, hansom and businesslike, his wife Carla, a former model, looked beautiful, cool and sophisticated when meeting the Royals.

As mentioned she is a former model and there is in existence a tasteful enough nude photo of her, taken before she ever imagined she might ever became the ‘first lady’ of France, that is going to be auctioned at Christies.

There is nothing she need be embarrassed about, she was honestly making her independent way in the world and that was a part of it. It owes something in style to the French artist Georges Seurat. If it were in oils no one could argue that it wasn’t tasteful art.

But the good old UK tabloids seldom fail to make us look like lowlifes. The visit proved and opportunity too tempting for them miss. They published the picture together with a leering two faced “Welcome to Great Britain, Madame Sarkozy”.

If it was not intended to be a calculated insult it could easily be taken as such. It could certainly be represented as such by anyone so inclined. Especially if they considered the politics of the tabloid and the government.

If a paper wished to publish the picture, maybe it would perhaps have been better to have done so before the visit, or wait until it was done. Or better still just printed an article to accompany it rather than trying to be ‘clever’.

Brits no longer believe fad diet claims

It seems Britain is becoming disenchanted with the claims of fad diets. Over the last 5 years sales of slimming products have dropped by a third. This may also hold true for low calorie and reduced fat products, as growth in that market appears to be plateauing.

After years of trying diets, with no discernable signs of success, people finally seem to have stopped believing the diets' claims anymore.

Mintel, the market research people state: "Attitudes to dieting have become more negative with a higher proportion of consumers believing that they are hard to follow, confusing and may be harmful."

This may be more promising than it seems. If the public are wising up about fad diets maybe they are also capable of learning the same lessons about politics. What with two of the major parties (New-Labour and Lib-Dem ) manifesto promises now clearly proven to be, like the diet’s claims; “Not subject to legitimate expectation”

Frankly, if they cannot be held to their promises, at least to a reasonable extent, then there is little point in voting for them at all. Especially when Parliament's power and relevance diminishes with every new ‘treaty’.

Of course, by now, many of us will have realised that the most reliable way of loosing pounds, at least from your pocket, is not by means of a New-Fad diet, it is to vote New-Labour. It will not be your waist you are watching, so much as their waste and ineptitude - your wallet loosing weight ;-)

Treason - Just too old fashioned a word for New-Labour

It seems that Treason may be just too old fashioned for New Labour.

Ex attorney General Lord Goldsmith is planning to ditch it as part of a ‘review’.

Now it may be because Gordon Brown is just too squeamish to charge British citizens with it who commit it by fighting against British troops at home or abroad, or attempting to kill British civilians going about their lawful business. It is an emotive word, even though that is exactly what they have done. They can't possibly be charged with it if it is done away with though and that would save a bit of official squirming among the Islington tendency political classes.

Or it may be New labour are mindful of the fact that it could easily be argued that Gordon Brown has already committed it in signing up to the Lisbon ‘Treaty’, or the majority of their MPs a quite a few Lib Dem MPs and Two ot three conservative ones committed it the other day, when they agreed to it…