If it wasn’t so catastrophically tragic, it might almost be funny.
and where is bliar?
oh yes
Has Tony Blair already quit Labour's campaign?
Reports emerge that Blair has taken his family on safari after just one election appearance
MORE LIKE VULTURES
FIGHTING OVER WHATS LEFT
ON THE
BONES
|
And Now They Want to be Re-Elected???
Would Nu-Labour have won the 1997 election – for all the faults of the Major government at the time – if Blair/Brown had said their real agenda was to multiple the public debt tenfold, to the point where it was out of control? And then do nothing about it?
If they had said they aimed to reduce the UK from the 7th most competitive country in the global market to 13th? Reduce the 4th most lightly taxed country to the 84th? Reduce the 4th least regulated country to the 86th?
If they had said they intended to turn the UK into a multicultural country by abandoning our border controls? That they would allow a near 50% increase in immigrants from Africa, and over half a million more people from Europe to take up residence in the UK?
That they would encourage immigrants to introduce their own standards, laws and life-styles, and ignore those of the country providing them with a new home?
That they would support immigrant families with the resources of the welfare state – housing, income, health services, free education? Allow the least well-educated, and those most ignorant of the British way of life, to become the fastest-growing community in the country?
They would provide that group with all the protection of British law, including changing the law to accommodate them, and asking nothing by way of commitment to the British way of life in return?
That they would victimize true-Brits who stood in the way, by creating laws to make difficult, or even forbid, criticism or opposition to these profound changes?
That they would, in effect, create a form of dual or parallel citizenship in which the members of one ethnic group in the UK could gain preferential treatment by the state to the disadvantage of the majority who were paying for their benefits?
That they would turn Britain into a nanny-state in which the government assumed the right to control almost every aspect of the lives of those who elected them?
That they would seize the right to snoop on everyone – and encourage neighbour to snoop on neighbour?
And now, as Brown seeks re-election, Blair’s successor tells us the tax man will be empowered by law to open our mail even before it reaches us.
And where has all this got us?
Over the last thirteen years Nu-Labour has created 5000 new crimes at the rate of one every day.
It has passed over 500 new Acts of Parliament, six on immigration, eight on terrorism, 12 on education, 11 on health and social care, and 25 on criminal justice. Many of them were enacted simply to comply with new EU directives.
Another 40,000 EU regulations passed into UK law without a single one of them ever being debated in the House. They were all nodded through by Statutory Instrument, because the EU forbids amendments.
And that’s before we get to all the wishy-washy grand new ideas Nu-Labour repetitively rolled out as policy, and later either forgot or diluted.
The latest – free care for the elderly – has no timetable, no budget, no detailed planning and no hope of becoming law.
It is just another vague, utterly unrealistic carrot to attract voters who are naive or foolish enough to believe this bunch of crooks.
And then we come to the money…
What a legacy they leave us, after squandering the golden economic scenario they inherited from the Tories in 1997.
(Just for the record this is the third time in my lifetime Labour has left office with the economy in a shambles. The claim is valid : successive generations never learn, and people who refuse to learn from history are condemned to make the same mistakes over and over again.)
The most serious economic crisis in half a century, if not ever, has been brought on by profligate spending on bloated public services which lacked clarity of purpose, lacked effective managerial control and which more often than not failed to deliver.
Are our hospitals any better for the billions spent on them in the last 13 years. No they are not. Are our schools any better? No. Are the police doing a better job? I don’t think so.
Because what matters far more than throwing money at a problem is ensuring that it is then used effectively. Worse, Nu-Labour’s abysmal ignorance of resource management is compounded by its obsession with endless targets which add layers of useless bureaucracy, absorb time and effort for no benefit, remove any clarity of purpose, and weight down and mis-direct the efforts of capable people trying to do the job they were hired to do.
No wonder public debt is out of control. It was out of control even before the financial crisis hit us.
Total state debt will be over a trillion pounds before we know it, and may even exceed the UK’s total gross annual income for the first time ever within a few years, unless we make draconian cuts. They are needed fast and need to go deep.
Alternatively we end up monetizing the debt and raging inflation then kicks in to diminish its true worth.
Slashing public spending to the bone would not be difficult.
We all know about the billions sent to Brussels, and the hundreds of billions wasted by British industry and commerce on compliance. That could be saved overnight by telling the EU that we will be good neighbours, trade with them, but only on our terms.
The message is simple enough :
they have to understand they cannot be masters in someone else’s house.
Back home, think of the money being squandered on many hundreds of quangos and the tens of thousands of people they employ. Between the lot of them they contribute almost nothing but trouble and aggravation to the people they are supposed to serve.
Think of the sheer numbers of incompetent employees at every level of the civil service. We have all encountered them and their pedantic questions and paperwork.
They may be civil servants but they rarely display any understanding of the word ‘civil’, and usually do not regard themselves as providing a service. We are usually left with the impression that, if they can create trouble and cause inconvenience, that is what they will do.
Then there is the cost of administering our labyrinthine tax system. Why not, as Kit Malthouse argued in The Times this week, abolish the lot and just use a higher level of VAT, or a new sales tax, to collect all taxation, subject only to nil rates on essentials. He is right. And I’ve been saying it for years.
Suddenly, there are tens of thousands of officials and accountants re-deployed into the private sector, many involved in new businesses. Vast amounts of management time and huge compliance costs are saved by every business in the country. Investment in new enterprises and in established businesses erupts.
The explosion of free enterprise, new jobs, new wealth-creation and new exports would transform our economy in no time. We all become winners, including the exchequer.
Such a nuclear change in our tax system would also turn the UK into the biggest off-shore tax haven of modern times, and force fiscal discipline on the governments of many other profligate countries. That, after all, is the supreme public-interest benefit of all tax havens. (No wonder Blair/Brown never told you that.)
Back here on earth, however, we still see money wasted on enforcing the nanny state, including millions spent on adverts on TV - to discourage smoking, on the radio to encourage people to apply for a new driving licence when they reach 70, in the media extolling the common sense virtue of not throwing good food away.
What business is it of government to waste our taxes on adverts like that? What happened to personal responsibility?
And why do we British taxpayers have to finance thousands of foreign students from Europe, and elsewhere, taking places at our universities, while our own children are deprived of higher education?
Last year nearly 120,000 students from the EU countries alone were educated in the UK at our expense, while 120,000 of our own children missed out.
We are now told we need another 20,000 new primary schools to educate young children.
But we are not reproducing ourselves fast enough to fill the places we have already.
Every one of those schools is needed to educate the children of immigrants.
Meanwhile, despite the UK spending nearly £90 billion on education this year (80% more than when Labour took office), there is absolutely no sign of the children already in school being educated properly, taught self-disciple, self-worth, self-reliance, or – for that matter – any British constitutional history.
Instead we continue to produce tens of thousands of ill-educated youngsters who are almost unemployable, and take their frustration out on the community that has failed to raise them properly.
Even if we started to sort out that problem it would take two generations to correct it, as we wait for those already on the streets to grow older.
Then there’s the EU, now set on a new mischief. Its latest lunacy is a threat to use the Lisbon Treaty to create a new form of economic government from Frankfurt, run by the Germans and the French, which would seize control of the City of London and the UK’s global financial services markets.
And what does our crass, certifiably insane government do about it? Absolutely nothing – because it knows it cannot, and is terrified to admit it.
Instead, it has the unbelievable audacity to ask us to vote them back into government.
If it wasn’t so catastrophically tragic, it might almost be funny.
To respond to, or comment on this Email, please email ashley.mote@btconnect.com
Click www.ashleymote.co.uk to visit the site now.
Posts
