BNP Manifesto 2010 : The Economy: Putting Britain Back on the Road to Recovery
• A BNP government would tackle the national debt problem by cutting expenditure on all projects which do not serve British interests.
• These expenditures which will be cut include the annual costs of £18 billion spent on “global warming,” the £13 billion spent on immigration, the £4 billion spent on asylum, the £15 billion spent on EU membership, the £9.1 billion spent on foreign aid, the billions spent fighting illegal and immoral foreign wars, and the billions spent on “politically correct” social engineering projects.
• The BNP undertakes not to reduce front-line public services while billions of pounds continue to flow out of the country to foreign interests. British people must benefit first from British tax income.
• The BNP aims to relieve the tax burden by raising the personal non-taxable allowance to £12,500.
• The BNP will encourage the family unit by reintroducing the married man’s allowance by as much as £2,500, depending upon the presence of children.
• The BNP will raise the inheritance tax level to £1 million.
• The BNP will work for a reduction in council tax through the slashing of all politically correct council functions and “diversity” schemes.
• The BNP would take some of these savings and invest them in rebuilding British industry and skills through an active protectionist policy as many other European nations already do.
• The BNP will rebuild Britain’s skills base — lost through decades of deindustrialisation caused by successive Tory and Labour regimes — by offering generous subsidies to students who study engineering and science and to institutions offering such education.
• The BNP will ensure that globalist corporations pay their fair share of the tax burden. We will close down the legal loopholes which allow tax evasion through Transfer Pricing and the outsourcing of jobs to foreign nations.
• The BNP will therefore introduce legislation to ensure that a foreign acquisition of any significantly-sized British company is judged to be in the public and national interest before it can proceed.
• The BNP will pass legislation to separate utility (high street) banks from the investment banking sector to prevent a repeat of the credit crisis.
• The BNP will oppose the privatisation of natural monopolies such as Royal Mail.
How Britain’s Industry and Economy Has Been Destroyed
Britain’s economy today is built upon a foundation of unsustainable rising debt and record trade deficits.
The Lab/Lib/Con alliance long ago abandoned any attempt to run the British economy for the benefit of the nation and have surrendered it to the dead hand of EU regulation and a rootless, amorphous globalist philosophy.
Inept governments, trades union militancy during the ’60s and ’70s and the increasing momentum of globalisation have combined to wreak extraordinary damage to the British economy, our industry and technology.
Britain, which was once a world leader in many technological and scientific fields, has had entire industrial sectors of our economy extirpated.
Factories, long closed or transferred overseas, cannot be re-opened when vital technical skills have been lost. ‘White flight’ or indigenous emigration, estimated to be in the region of half a million per year, has meant the loss of many of our skilled technical workers.
Any policy designed to repair this damage will take many years to complete and must involve governmental restructuring of both the educational system and the economy.
The tiger states of East Asia, such as South Korea and Singapore, operate their economies and industries in the national interest and that is the economic model which Britain should emulate.
Education’s Key Role in Rebuilding Britain
Official figures show that our country lacks engineers and scientists, a sad indictment on a nation that has produced approximately 50 percent of the world’s inventions.
These and other skills, which have been permitted to decline, will be invigorated under a BNP government.
We shall offer generous subsidies to students — both in terms of their coursework and accommodation — who embark upon such study.
Only in this way can new industries, skills and inventions be created upon which the manufacturing, engineering and scientific base of our nation can be reinvigorated.
We shall also increase funding to the research, scientific and technological departments of our universities, tripling it in the first two years and progressively raising this investment as results accrue.
The BNP fully endorses the “Manifesto for Physics” issued by the Institute of Physics which, independently of our party, calls for an increase in funding for the scientific community’s educational programme.
Reinventing and Rebuilding British Industry
It is nonsensical that Britain exports it know-how and many of its most talented people to overseas competitors so that they may develop their industrial base and then undercut and undermine our industries at home.
Our task will be to redevelop our industrial, scientific, technological and manufacturing base and, in so doing, reinvent our economy.
In pursuance of this aim, we shall place significant criminal penalties on the export of technology and inventions, which will be permitted only by government license.
Cutting Government Expenditure
With the current budget deficit at record heights, it would be grossly imprudent to increase Government borrowing, except in a case of dire emergency.
Fortunately, a British National Party government would find considerable scope to raise revenues without increasing the tax burden.
Unlike the other parties, the BNP plans to cut all expenditure which is not in the national interest, rather than cutting front-line services to the British people. These cuts would include:
– The Climate Change Scam
The cost of so-called man-made climate change is estimated at some £18 billion per annum.
The BNP has highlighted the nonsense that has been employed in support of this fraud, visited upon the electorate by the three old gang parties in order to facilitate international governance and opportunistic corporate profit.
The £18 billion levy is made up of subsidies and the ‘green levy’ that is charged to current energy bills. Consumers pay these disguised costs often without even being aware.
– The Immigration Racket
The cost of the multicultural society (which has been imposed without any debate whatsoever by the three old gang parties and promoted by the Greens, UKIP, the SNP and Plaid Cymru) is estimated to be in the order of £13 billion per annum, according to MigrationwatchUK.
This embraces the cost of social security, crime, health tourism and NHS costs, translation expenses, unemployment, equalities legislation, education, related bureaucracy and much else.
The asylum swindle costs Britain in the region of £4 billion per year in terms of benefits, housing, support and legal fees.
– EU Membership
The cost of the EU for Britain in membership fees falls a little short of £15bn. Whilst a portion of this flows back to Britain, it may only be spent in such a manner as is prescribed by unelected EU officialdom.
The costs related to EU membership are in reality far higher.
The Taxpayers’ Alliance has estimated the savings to the economy of withdrawal from the EU, largely in terms of the regulatory burden, at £118 billion, and this does not even count the cost of damage inflicted upon our agricultural and fisheries industries.
While the halting of this cash haemorrhage will not immediately accrue to the Treasury, it will boost the British economy and ultimately enhance the taxable revenue base.
According to Open Europe, the expense of complying with EU rules cost each British household £4,912 over the past 11 years.
– The Foreign Aid Scandal
The cost of overseas aid is currently at some £9.1 billion per year. This cash goes directly to nations who very often are not in need of such aid (China and India, both of whose economies are larger that Britain’s), or to utterly corrupt states where it serves no good at all.
To make matters worse, it is the declared intention of all the other parties to increase foreign aid to around £13 billion per year.
The BNP would halt all foreign aid while there is poverty and deprivation inside Britain.
– Quangos and Politically Correct Social Engineering Schemes
Billions are spent every year funding assorted quangos such as the Equalities and Human Rights Commission and the myriad of ethnic organisations.
By cutting funding to these schemes and eliminating waste, bureaucracy, inefficiency, and unnecessary jobs in these quangos, we anticipate saving at least some £10 billion per year.
– Illegal and Immoral Foreign Wars
The BNP will immediately end British involvement in all illegal and immoral foreign wars into which the Tory/Labour regime have plunged Britain.
The cost of the war in Iraq is estimated to have been some £49 billion, while the cost of the war in Afghanistan is set to rise from £3 billion to £5 billion per year.
Revenues and Taxation
The UK Treasury forecasts that the nation’s debt will exceed 75 percent of gross domestic product by 2014 (£167 billion), up from 43 percent just a few years ago.
Worse still, a recent paper by the Bank for International Settlements forecast that the UK’s debt will rise to 300 percent of the GDP by 2040.
Current government fiscal policy has borrowed growth from the future which must be repaid. In particular, the vast cost of bailing out the banking sector will be paid by the next generation.
It is estimated by the Institute of Fiscal studies that within four years, more than 10p in every pound of tax Britons pay will go towards the servicing of the Government’s ballooning debt interest bill.
Many of the ratings agencies regard a country as entering fiscal crisis and a likely downgrade in its credit rating once its debt interest payments exceed 10 percent of tax revenues.
Whilst we appreciate that a certain amount of debt is required by the Government, especially during recession, our view is that debt crowds out private investment and should be minimised.
As a result, the BNP sets itself as a goal the reduction of the debt to GDP ratio of some 30–40 percent.
Such a ratio will compare favourably with our competitors and will also reduce the debt burden and servicing costs to future generations.
It will also free up money for investment into infrastructure and services of direct benefit to the British people.
Stimulating the Economy: Lower Taxation Must Be the Ultimate Aim
Excessive taxation reduces productive activity and Britain has already reached a point at which further increases in tax rates will yield no meaningful revenue.
The BNP aims to lower taxation rates, both immediately and over the long term.
Immediate cuts which can be made which are feasible, affordable and especially desirable:
– A rise in the personal non-taxable allowance to £12,500
The BNP will raise the personal non-taxable allowance to £12,500. It is ridiculous that the lowest and poorest section of the community should be taxed on subsistence wages.
To offset this, repeated governments have introduced a myriad of credits, for which those affected must apply and at a vast cost to bureaucracy.
In other words, the Government increases taxes on the one hand, and then employs a bureaucracy to supplement the living standards of the poorest section of the community on the other.
The BNP will halt this double-edged spending madness by simply raising the personal allowance to £12,500 before any tax becomes payable. The savings in bureaucracy alone will more than compensate for this move.
– Reintroduce the Married Man’s Allowance
To encourage and reward the family unit, the BNP will reintroduce the married man’s allowance by as much as £2,500, depending upon the presence of children.
This, in conjunction with the £12,500 above, will raise the point at which tax is payable by married couples.
This change may result in some off-setting upward movement in the basic rate at which tax will commence.
Our aim is to maintain revenue neutrality, remove an enormous burden of bureaucracy and, not least, to incentivise the lowest earners in the community.
– Increase the Inheritance Tax Threshold to £1 million
Inheritance tax (IHT) is, in effect, a double tax as it taxes the already taxed income of a deceased person. We do not believe that an individual’s life work should be appropriated by the state.
The BNP will therefore raise the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million.
Corporate Taxation: We believe in dynamic, profitable companies
Taxation in essence makes the Government into the equivalent of a shareholder in private undertakings by withdrawing a “dividend” in the form of tax revenue.
The greater the profit achieved by the corporation, the greater the tax income which accrues to the government for the benefit of the nation.
We therefore believe in creating an environment which is healthy for businesses and consumers alike though dynamic competition.
However, it is of great concern that globalist corporations are able to effectively circumvent their tax burden by exploiting legal loopholes known as transfer pricing and by outsourcing jobs to factories and call centres overseas.
To combat the latter phenomenon, the BNP will introduce a special ‘level playing field’ charge on companies that evade taxes in Britain by outsourcing.
Transfer pricing is the practice whereby assets, services and funds are exchanged within globalist corporations through their various subsidiaries.
The transfer price can be manipulated to affect the “profits” and therefore taxes paid by the international arms of a large corporation.
In essence, profits are transferred through this internal process to countries where taxes are low.
Globalisation has enabled, for instance, a microchip company to design products in one country, manufacture in another, hold patents in another and assign marketing rights to a company elsewhere.
This structure provides enormous discretion in allocating costs to each country and shifts profits through international trade.
According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), some 60 percent of world trade consists of internal transfers within multinational corporations.
That, in turn, provides opportunities to transfer profits across borders.
By weighting their costs to the UK, where taxes are relatively high, corporations are able to reduce their taxes to the Exchequer.
The effect of this process is two-fold: the shortfall in taxes must be made good elsewhere and, secondly, domestic corporations — especially Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SME) — are placed at a disadvantage because they must pay corporation tax at the full UK rate.
A recent media report revealed that three leading banana companies, which control two thirds of the worldwide banana trade, generated $50 billion in sales and $1.4 billion in global profits over a five year period — but paid only 14 percent taxes on profits.
In the UK, these companies reported combined sales of over £400 million but paid a paltry £128,000 in tax.
Nearly a third of the UK’s 700 largest businesses paid no corporation tax in the year 2005–6, according to figures from the National Audit Office.
This situation is untenable. The BNP will scrutinise, very carefully, the activities of the multinational corporations and the accounts of their various subsidiaries so as to ascertain their tax savings.
We oppose the view that the international profit and market share of the globalist corporation, facilitated by laissez-faire economics, should assume priority over the interests of the nation state, British companies and their employees.
Small and Medium Sized Enterprises
One of the most important inhibiting factors on SMEs — which provide the larger part of Britain’s employment — has been the vast layer of regulation which emanates from the EU.
A BNP government’s withdrawal from the EU will enable us to alleviate the onerous weight of regulation that is so harmful to SMEs. This encompasses well over 100,000 different laws and regulations, all created since the Conservative government signed the Treaty of Rome in 1973.
Many of these regulations are onerous to business, job creation and profitability. They undermine employment opportunities, especially for part-time and older workers.
The working time directive is but one example and, inter alia, it imposes a strain of record keeping required for compliance purposes.
For the larger company, the cost of regulation can more easily be absorbed as an overhead but this is not always viable for SMEs.
A BNP government will balance the interests of SME employer and employee rights by repealing burdensome rules and regulations on companies employing 20 persons or less.
Relieved of excessive regulations and bureaucracy, SMEs will thrive and this will stimulate private sector employment.
Foreign Investment and British Companies
The BNP welcomes inward investment. There is, however, a difference between ‘replacement’ investment and ‘additional’ investment.
By ‘replacement’ investment, we refer to the takeover of British companies in a process which has been ruthlessly encouraged in the name of laissez-faire economics and globalisation by the old gang parties.
In the past decade or so, such great names as these have fallen to foreign takeovers: Cadbury, BOC, ICI, Corus, Hanson, Abbey National, O2, Scottish Power, BAA, P&O, Scottish and Newcastle, Lucas, Plessey, Rolls-Royce motor cars, amongst others.
By ‘additional’ investment, we refer to the establishment of new investment and technology, such as the creation of the Nissan plant some years ago in Sunderland.
When a large British company is taken over by a foreign concern, several things occur.
First, the revenue streams from these companies flow overseas.
Secondly, the corporate headquarters usually follows likewise.
Similarly, the vital function of research and development is likely to pass abroad, along with the technological know-how of the company concerned.
Not least, the corporate and employment taxation revenues, previously available to the British government, become jeopardised, especially when British factories are closed and jobs transferred abroad.
The recent disgraceful closure of the Corus plant is a case in point. This caused thousands of redundancies and the transfer of vital strategic manufacturing to India.
This activity, in our view, equates to criminal economic vandalism.
When Jungheinrich, for example, bought Lancer Boss, the German company replaced the British banks with German banks; the company’s insurance passed to Allianz and SAP became the computer system. British component suppliers were replaced by continental suppliers.
We propose to deal with them by differentiating between ‘additional’ investment and ‘replacement’ investment, as follows:
– ‘Additional Investment’: The UK provides a large affluent market. The BNP welcomes ‘additional’ investment, and the skills, expertise, technology, capital and machinery generally associated therewith.
– ‘Replacement Investment’: The BNP welcomes overseas investment in British companies which might otherwise fail.
However, the BNP deprecates the takeover of great British companies by overseas concerns which in recent years, has embraced much of our commercial, manufacturing and commercial base.
We shall therefore introduce legislation to ensure that each acquisition of a significant British company is judged to be in the ‘public and national interest’.
It will be the task of the bidding company to demonstrate that their takeover fulfils these requirements.
In situations where a takeover is deemed to satisfy the ‘public and national interest’ requirement, we shall legislate to ensure that, in certain situations, a minimum equity stake will also remain in British possession, either privately or in terms of a stock market flotation.
Finally, we must register our particular dismay at the takeover of British utilities by overseas concerns.
Utility companies provide a reliable income stream and we shall require the divestment of foreign ownership thereof in an appropriate and orderly manner.
The BNP is further committed to ensuring that natural monopolies such as the national rail network be returned to state ownership as this is the only manner in which the necessary infrastructure investment is possible.
Globalisation and the Protection of British Industry
The BNP opposes globalisation which is extremely harmful to our nation for two reasons:
– It results in the importation into the West of millions of immigrants (in the form of “cheap” labour) from the Third World; and
– It transfers technology, manufacturing and industry to the Third World. This in turn causes the exploitation in labour in those nations and ultimately the collapse of our own living standards due to the inability of our industries to compete with that “cheap” labour.
The BNP also objects to the existence of disagreeable practices in the Third World, often tolerated by globalist corporations in the pursuit of international profit.
Such examples include the employment of child labour, the use of political and other prisoners to produce goods, lax environmental rules that would not be tolerated in the West, poor protection for workers, the absence of trades unions and employees’ representation, onerous working hours, an absence of social security systems, health insurance and so on.
Clearly, this places overseas enterprises at a considerable commercial advantage and facilitates cheap competition.
We are also aware of the restrictions many countries impose to protect their home industry, either in the form of red tape or direct tariffs.
We shall therefore impose selective tariffs on the import of goods from the Third World. Only those foreign nations and corporations who agree to abide by our strict social, environmental and ethical trading policies will be permitted to export their goods freely into the United Kingdom market.
To allow industry and commerce to adapt, tariffs will be imposed gradually through the years of our first term in office.
We are wary of the burden this may place on British consumers. In consequence, to avoid any general upward price movement, we shall reduce VAT (or such equivalent as we may introduce) with a view to securing revenue neutrality.
As already observed, some 60 percent of the world’s trade occurs as internal transfers within multinational corporations. This is detrimental to the environment and the measures outlined in this manifesto will diminish this proportion.
Not least, the option of closing down British manufacturing or services in favour of the Third World will become an unattractive proposition.
Finally, whilst we oppose globalisation, we would observe that the process creates disequilibrium within developing countries where self-sufficiency is eroded in favour of cash-crops, for example, at an expense to the environment.
Financial Markets and the Banking Crisis
The rebuilding of the British economy will generate attractive conditions for investment and it will be necessary to harness the skills and expertise that the city of London and its regional hubs provide.
A healthy stock market will form a part of our strategy to raise and attract capital.
The BNP differentiates between the numerous valuable activities within the City, such as investment, fund management, insurance, etc, and the recent excesses within the banking sector.
These excesses were recently described by Lord Turner, Chairman of the Financial Services Authority and a banker himself, as “economically useless,” and he also described the ‘bonus culture’ as having created “excessive risk-taking.”
Traditionally, banking was regarded as an important utility to oil the wheels of the productive economy.
Today, departments within the banking sector have become speculative vehicles where vast bonuses are earned in financial markets, at no risk of personal loss to the traders concerned.
Monies are being gambled, in the knowledge that shortfalls will be borne by the bank but any profits will be richly rewarded.
We recognise that when the economy is healthy, the banking sector provides significant tax revenues to the Treasury.
By contrast, during recession, difficulties within the banking sector often cause dire difficulties in the real economy.
The bankers then expect the Government to stand behind the sector — a process known as ‘moral hazard’ — which excuses even greater risk-taking in the good times.
This is unacceptable and creates misery, not least to the taxpayer, which has to make good the price of overconfidence and short-term profits.
To obviate these widespread concerns, we propose the following measures:
– A rigid separation between the utility (high street) banks and the investment banking sector.
The former will no longer be permitted to invest in derivatives, private equity or speculative instruments.
The latter will not be permitted to engage in retail or corporate deposit taking.
– The elimination of the short-term bonus culture. All bonuses to be paid in instruments connected to the underlying departmental profit, over a three to five year period.
– The restoration of the authority of the Bank of England (which will be renamed to the Bank of Great Britain) to oversee the regulation of the City and banking sector.
– The removal of the assumption that any institution is too big to fail. Whilst the Government should properly guarantee the savings of retail and corporate depositors within limits, the Government will not act as a bailing mechanism for shareholders or bondholders.
This applies particularly to banking failures. Rather than bailing out the reckless individuals who cause such collapses, the state would be far better off picking up the pieces to form a national reconstruction bank where individual savers would have their savings protected and guaranteed.
– The increase of minimal capital ratios to 10 percent of assets, with downward flexibility permitted in times of recession, as determined by the Bank of England.
– The doubling of capital required by banking institutions engaged in proprietary trading.
– The division of Lloyds Banking Group, which has clearly exceeded an appropriate size in a competitive economy, following its recent ill-judged takeover of HBOS.
We are also sceptical of the presence of vast international banking corporations, whose political, economic and global ambitions are very different to our own.
We shall not hesitate to introduce legislation to break up these financial combines, if necessary, to require their British activities to be divided into national subsidiaries, either with local partners or via a flotation on the London market.
We shall strictly forbid their intrusion into the political domain.
We expect the measures above to address the imbalances created by the bankers’ bonus culture. Where this does not occur, we shall employ the taxation regime accordingly.
Finally, we applaud the recent discussion of the introduction of a ‘Tobin Tax’ on spot conversions of one currency into another. Its application, however, would only be feasible by international agreement and we suspect there is an absence of determination to apply it.
Private Finance Initiative (PFI) Schemes
We are deeply sceptical about PFI, both in terms of the public interest and their efficiency, methods and operations.
The small print of the 2009 Budget revealed the costs of PFI projects would rise to over £10 billion a year between 2014–18.
PFI ensures that private sector consortiums build and run major public infrastructure projects. The consortium raises the funding and the Government pays this back plus profit over the contract, which typically lasts between 25 to 35 years.
While private investment may well have a useful role to play in the financing of certain public services, we regard the present PFI system as one of the great corruption scandals of an era in which financial corruption in political and business life is regrettably endemic.
PFI as it stands is a recipe for the corporate looting of Britain’s national common wealth, a mechanism for turning essential public services into private profit centres.
We would halt all such schemes and institute a wide ranging audit into all existing projects.
The inquiry will include extensive police investigations into the business interests and subsequent directorships and similar rewards enjoyed by the politicians who have voted to facilitate the largest theft of the ‘commons’ since the Enclosure Acts.
Assets and payments reclaimed for the public purse following successful prosecutions would be returned to the control of democratically elected political bodies, ranging from councils to Parliament as appropriate.
General Issues
There are several truisms that should be observed in any oversight of the economy:
1. Not all aspects of material well-being are measurable within the economy. Thus, a child may be better cared for at home than in a day-care centre, but the economic statistics record merely the latter activity.
This creates the illusion that we possess a higher material standard of living when we purchase things that were formerly produced within the traditional family.
There are other examples of how the obsession for Gross National Product misrepresents our material well-being. Social and environmental degradation do not show up in the figures.
A safe neighbourhood that requires no private security guards shows a lower level of economic output than a dangerous neighbourhood, where every business must hire such protection.
Numerous lawyers settling disputes by expensive litigation provides another example.
We therefore reject the thesis that economic output is necessarily connected with material well-being.
2. Related to the above is the misconception that because immigration increases GDP, it must be favourable to the economy.
Immigration merely raises economic activity. It does not raise GDP per capita; instead it undermines wages and productivity.
If immigration increased the GDP and general wealth of a society, then logically it would be far better for mass immigration to take place into Third World countries to boost the economies in those nations.
3. Immigration creates environmental pressures, congestion, the concreting over of the rural landscape and severe housing shortages.
Housing shortages create upward pressure on property prices and lifelong debt for the average family. Our supply of land is finite.
4. Sustainable income is relevant. As trustees, we hold an obligation to future generations of Britons.
Economic “quick fixes” abound, but they exact a price in the long run.
Thus, unions that exact wage increases which their employers cannot afford, produce corporate bankruptcies and redundancies.
Similarly, governments that spend borrowed money oblige future taxpayers with repayments plus interest.
5. Capital investment is sound economics. Long-term prosperity depends upon capital investment and provides the dividends for those in retirement.
The BNP supports policies designed to raise the national savings rate and the reconstruction of a broadly based, profitable and sustainable British economy.
Similarly, we support incentive schemes designed to encourage employee financial participation in their company’s activities, via the taxation regime.
6. The taxation system is in urgent need of overhaul. Far too many professional people are involved in administering the complications within the tax code or advising thereon. Far too many businessmen struggle with complex record keeping.
7. Our views of the economy are founded in pragmatism. We believe in low taxes, commensurate with running efficient, productive and superlative services.
The reforms we introduce will be gradual, to permit evidence of the efficacy and operation.
8. Where national or local government makes investments, tenders should be given to British companies unless there are exceptional and compelling reasons not to.
Given our intention to develop essential infrastructure, especially in energy generation, we envisage the creation of new industry and we shall specially favour new companies in this regard.
9. We also favour workers’ co-operative and workers’ ownership schemes within industry and commerse which have worked well for companies such as the John Lewis Partnership.
The party’s economic policy supports the principles of Distributism, whereby ownership and control of the economy should be distributed as widely as possible.
Council Tax is Too High
The BNP intends to cut council tax significantly by eliminating the expensive network of politically correct social engineering projects and the unnecessary, often EU-imposed bureaucracy which all councils are forced to maintain.
To this extent, we shall abolish all politically correct council functions, including those appertaining to ‘climate change’.
We will conduct a full audit of the extent and cost of these typically superfluous operations once we take control of our first Unitary Authority council, from which we shall prepare a general assessment.
Furthermore, we deprecate the outrageous salaries paid to council employees at taxpayers’ expense.
We shall limit council salaries to a maximum of £100,000 per annum. This will generate vast savings for local taxpayers and limit the profligate pension schemes which many senior council officers fund for themselves with public monies.
Quantitative Easing
The fact that the banking system has been able to increase the supply of money electronically has confirmed the long-held nationalist interpretation of money creation, namely that it is possible to generate ‘valid’ banknotes quite literally out of nothing.
This new money has been employed to purchase gilt-edged stock, with a view to lowering interest rates. We would have employed at least a significant element of the new funding to create capital projects and investment in new infrastructure in the energy and transportation sectors — which would also have created real jobs.
Currently, new money — excepting for the very small fraction of money that comprises notes and coin — enters into circulation as an interest bearing debt from the activities within the banking sector.
The banking sector is undoubtedly efficient in allocating credit but the question is whether the nation’s credit should, in part or in whole, be created under Crown authority?
In such an event, would it not best be employed to finance the public sector, thus enabling a reduction in taxation?
The right to issue money should ultimately rest with the state, and not with a consortium of private bankers.
Quangos and Public Services
The estimated cost of Quangos (quasi autonomous national government organisations) varies between £46 billion to upwards of £150 billion.
Chief executives and others, often favoured in terms of their appointments, receive exorbitant salaries from the public purse.
Meanwhile, the average voter is painfully aware that the quality of public services such as those in the NHS, educational sector and public transport has not improved.
Clearly, Labour has directed increased public spending towards tiers of bureaucrats. It is no accident that these public administrators of the state are the core supporters of New Labour.
Our primary programme for the reform of public services will be the elimination of bureaucratic positions and the reallocation of funds to direct providers of services.
Privatisation
Generally, privatisation is a solution only where real competition demonstrably produces better services and prices for the consumers of those services.
Where there are natural monopolies in operation, however, privatisation is generally unacceptable.
We therefore oppose, for example, the privatisation of the Royal Mail, which, along with the Post Office, we shall safeguard, as both provide essential public services.
With regard to Royal Mail, the BNP will oppose the cherry-picking of its most profitable routes by private contractors. This causes a shortfall in revenue streams and an inevitable inflationary price rise in service costs to the public.
The public’s right to a universal service is a paramount consideration.
Within this consideration, we also deprecate the transfer of essential governmental functions to overseas commercial enterprises, who benefit from a guaranteed stream of taxation-funded revenues.
The Legal Profession
Law is perhaps the one remaining profession that has yet to be subjected to the bracing wind of competition.
Legal fees comprise a significant cost to private individuals and SMEs.
It should be possible for enterprises such as banks and building societies to employ legal advisors to advise the public directly — a process that has been described as ‘Tesco-law.’
We shall scrutinise very carefully the restricted practices observed within the legal profession and remove them unless they specifically work in the interests of consumers, rather than lawyers.
We shall also insist on greater price transparency and competition.
We note that the Law Society oversees the functioning of the legal profession but we shall ensure that competing legal bodies, properly regulated, are established to compete with the present monopoly institution, as already occurs in the accountancy profession, for example.
These new bodies may specialise generally or in chosen fields.
The BNP’s Objective
It is our desire to rebuild and encourage a strong, vibrant, dynamic, innovative and competitive economy and industrial base, predicated upon the demand that it operates in the national interest.
It is a primary responsibility of government to create such a framework.
It is also our wish:
• To provide our people with the opportunity to attain a high, rising, secure and dignified standard of living; and
• To protect the nation from influences that might damage this opportunity.
BNP Manifesto 2010
BNP Manifesto 2010 : British National Party Key Pledges
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Defending Britain: BNP Defence Policy
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Immigration: An Unparalleled Crisis Which Only the BNP Can Solve
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Environmental Protection and the “Climate Change” Theory
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Leaving the European Union
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Counter Jihad: Confronting the Islamic Colonisation of Britain
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Renationalising the Welfare State
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Freedom for All: The Restoration of Our Civil Liberties
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Constitutional Change: Protecting and Enhancing Our Heritage
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Democracy and the Media
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Culture, Traditions and Civil Society
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Time to Get Tough on Crime and Criminals
BNP Manifesto 2010 : A Healthy Nation: Public Health and the NHS
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Education for a British Future
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Transport: Getting Britain Moving Again
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Agriculture: Food and Fisheries
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Energy: Fuelling the Nation’s Growth
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Foreign Policy: Putting British Interests First
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Housing: Sheltering the Nation
BNP Manifesto 2010 : The Economy: Putting Britain Back on the Road to Recovery
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Creating Local Economies
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Pensions: Looking After Our Old People
BNP Manifesto 2010 : IT and the Digital Revolution: The BNP’s Vision
BNP Manifesto 2010 : Conclusion
Copyright ©, The British National Party, PO Box 1223, Belfast, BT4 9DD. All rights reserved. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved.
“Why should an immigrant arrive in this country, claim job seekers and be given a council house”
That doesn’t happen, it’s a BNP lie.
At least do the research before posting BNP lies.
If the above happens show the evidence, do some research and post some official sources that show new immigrants get JSA etc… I’ve done this research and they are not entitles to benefits.
If the BNP claims are so right why do they make up lies to support their warped ideas all the time?
David
View Comment
No you’re quite right. No one would be able to claim JSA as soon as they enter this country. However when taking up a low paid job they are entitled to a host of benefits which will be paid even though their families are not here in the UK. Council housing WAS also set aside for immigrants. They weren’t jumping the queue just getting houses which had been marked as not available for Brits.
The sheer number of immigrants and their expanding families also creates heavy strain on health care and schooling at a time when the goverment will be spending less on these services.
You know when things have gone too far – when they have to make sure that signs are in Polish as well as the National language. I used to work in a factory in Wales. Signs by law had to be in Polish and English. Not a Welsh word to be seen.
View Comment
you say they contribute to the economy?,most of the money the polls and rumanians for example earn gets sent back to their country to their famillies, that is why the likes of the polish economy has boomed in the last 12 months.also if a married poll works here he can have his tax credit and familly allowance sent to his familly in poland,how much is that costing the economy?
View Comment
Good to have a healthy debate? I was debating with you some pages back before you decided to not retort.
And so I will attack you at the forefront of the comment section.
1. “I don’t trust the main parties”, if you had done a tiny bit of research you would have realised by now that not one Liberal Democrat was involved in the expenses scandal. I think we can trust Liberal Democrats.
2. The Liberal Democrats have not been in power for some 60 years, and even now while they’re not in power they constantly vote against anything which infringes on our rights (i.e the Digital Economy Bill), and often push bills forward which are so quickly rejected by LabCon such as the ability to sack your MP if you feel they’re not doing a good job, and getting rid of the inherited house of lords scheme and replacing it with voted lords, as well as significantly reducing then number of lords.
3. The Liberal Democrats constantly give clear answers, and why the us ‘ifs and buts’ is because they cannot make these changes happen if you do not vote for them.
4. The Liberal Democrats are the most honest and transparent party I know, the BNP have secret agenda’s such as deporting all non ‘indigenous’ British, as well as enforcing Christian laws. To truly govern a country you have to rule out religion (Nick Clegg is agnostic/atheist).
5. Under the Liberal Democrats there is protection for British workers, and the Lib Dems policy on immigration is that if there is a shortage of a sort of job in an area (Normally high skilled jobs such as doctors), then they import those with the skills and offer them jobs in whichever area they’re required in that certain part of the country, that way we don’t have immigrants overpopulating any one part of the country.
6. I love being part of the EU, it actually allows the UK to speak on a global level as well as allows for easy cross channel inner EU trade, such as no custom charges when buying from anywhere in EU (All of those who buy online know how much of a pain customs can be), as well as the EU Human Rights Department which specialises in, as the title suggests, Human Rights. Furthermore if Britain is to adopt the euro, it will allow for even easier financial transactions, while I do like the GBP as it is very strong, the Euro is almost as strong. It is only weaker by a couple of pence. Not to mention that having the EU helps to prevent inner-Europe wars (think WWI and WWII, both pre-EU).
7. While you may be tired of paying taxes towards people who are not from UK, this is very hard to stop as this is how a true libertarian society can prosper, otherwise we enter the grounds of fascism. I personally do not mind paying tax for immigrants who live here, as I have seen some of the countries they come from, and seen the horrible living conditions there, I’m thinking for instance – the slums of India. We live in an equal society, and therefore if you were to reduce the amount given to immigrants as oppose to those given to British Citizens, then we’d move into the territory of inequality, implying that because they’re not British Citizens that they’re a lesser being and not worthy enough to get what we get, bad waters to be in.
8. The reason you have seen no improvement in public life is because the wrong parties have been in power, liberal democrats want to pour more money into the UK transport system, trying to find greener alternatives to using cars, they also want to reduce class sizes in primary schools to 20, and in secondary schools to 16, introduce more one to one tutoring, and also introduce evening and weekend classes for students who are falling behind( Why these don’t already exist is beyond me).
9.The Liberal Democrats were the only party against the illegal war in Iraq. But the lib dems also understand that now we’re in there it’s a lot harder than just pulling out, and that’s why the propose raising them minimum wage for those serving in the army to the same as those who are in the police force and the fire brigade, as well as to supply our troops with better, overdue, equipment as well as dismantle the pointless cold war nuclear submarine.
Religion is a waste of time, I’m an atheist liberal, and will be for as long as I live, a true peaceful society can only exist if it is made up of atheist liberals, yes both the Bible and the Qur’an are as bad as each other, both of them teach their followers to force people to join their religion, and if they refuse to kill them, horrible, horrible stuff. And to think it all started because someone wrote a science fiction novel and titled it “The Bible”….
View Comment
Glasgow-born Brown, 42, gave £2.4 million to the party in the run-up to the 2005 General Election but the legality of his donation has been questioned.
The businessman, whose home is in Mallorca, now faces 18 charges, including money laundering, theft and perverting the course of justice.
Will your party give this money back?
18 of the lib dems 62 MPs bothered to actually turn up to vote for the digital economy bill. Not even the leader came along.
Do you think that the issues that are being debated at the moment anybody has the ‘digital economy’ at the top of the list?
During the first debate. The Con leader asked the Lib leader, whether or not the lib party would give the money back. There was no clear response.
We are already over populated. That’s one issue. I don’t think the whole issue is to do with immigration (it hasn’t helped), it’s more to do that people and cultures clash and that British people do not feel they have been treated fairly.
How about you introduce a policy for stopping offshoring of jobs abroad if the role exists in the UK. Is this not fair for the UK?
Taking skilled people from 3rd world countries is doing more harm than good. Do you not agree?
It is also causing grief for the countries from where they had come from. A question for you. Say a country had 100 doctors and we needed 100 doctors, who would be better off – if the doctors all came over here and who would lose out.
Lets have a referendum on that. I think that is fair. Let the people in UK decide for themselves.
Fine you can do whatever with your taxes. I’ve suggested that we could do the following:
Each person in the UK who is employed, can be asked by their employer, whether or not they would like to contribute a percentage of their salary to be used abroad. I think this is a fair and transparent idea that could be adopted. A similar scheme already exists for donating money to charity.
Your comments about India. I’ve got lots of Indian friends and they are extremely well off. The issue with India is a ‘class one’ and they can help themselves, if they wanted to. This is not our fault.
Where is the money going to come from to pay for this? More tax increases.
Like the idea about not using cars. I cycle everywhere I can.
Do you really think there will be an end to the war. I do not – and neither do my friends in the forces. If we did pull out like the BNP have suggested then there is going to be war (but at least no more dead soldiers), but at the same time, we shouldn’t be risking British lives over there at all.
I think regardless of what party is power there is going to be a lot more trouble to follow.
I would prefer it if we kept our nuclear subs, because regardless if you agree with nuclear weapons or not, it has acted as a deterrent.
What do you think of the people who are abusing our forces?
Ideally religion would not exist, but it does. I’m not entirely sure what difference a lib government would make here.
What would the libs do with the people who are abusing our soldiers?
Peaceful protest is acceptable, but the things that we have seen on TV are not. I would like something done about that.
regards
View Comment
Hi Sorry yep – I had been away for a few days and had trouble finding your post. But in response to that post, where we were having a debate.
Yes I had watched the programme and the idea of allocating people to certain areas will not work. All that will happen is the following:
People will disapear? As is happening now. The plan while a good one – just will not work in this country.
I thought though your leader put in a good performance though!
You have also forgotten to point out that in your manefisto the Libs want to allow illiegal immingrants to stay over here. I do not.
We will allow people who have been in Britain without
the correct papers for ten years, but speak English, have a clean
record and want to live here long-term to earn their citizenship.
However, generally people do not want more influx of foreign workers over here, regardless of race/colour/creed. Otherwise it would not be in each parties manefesto.
The reason that I had brought up insurance is that you had brought up insurance in your previous posts, I was adding balance to to your views.
First of all I said that I haver worked in the industry for 13 years. And that I was ACII (ACII is a qualification not a job role) and I do not believe you are in any position to comment about
someones knowledge of the industry. I was just correcting you on your assumptions that UK and USA private healthcare VS Uk medical insurance differs which it does not.
I suggest you read a couple of policy booklets and have a look at a couple of proposal forms. You will find that the questions/terms/conditions/market exclusions are the same.
Your original statements spoke about the USA health system. My opinion is ‘it is is no different from’ taking out private medical insurance. The reason why we have private medical insurance
in the UK is because the NHS is a mess.
Ideally, the NHS would be perfect but it is not. Operation waiting lists are so long that people are forced to go private. Which means they
are paying twice. Also of note: Dentists – When was the last time you tried to find a NHS dentist? I’ve lived all around the UK and I can tell you now – they are very scarce indeed. I have,
along with others have to go private. Also of note: On the NHS certain medicines/treatments are not available due to cost. Again not an issue with Private Health Care. Its a farce that
you have NHS nurses and doctors who also work for private hospitals. Either you have one or the other, however, in my opinion if you choose private healthcare you should have a
reduction in the NI that comes out of our wage packets each month.
Please explain: what has this got to do with the BNP. YOur original statement suggested that if the BNP was in power that we would not have a healthcare system, and then you compared
it against Americia?.
America’s health care system was not brought about via Right Wing politics? But at the same time, you have critised it.
I can advise you now ‘ whilst the USA will collect credit card details etc, the same applies with medical insurance in this country.
If you do not pay your premiums then you are not covered? No system is perfect each has its positives and negatives.
If you are unhappy about the fact that only British people will be looked after, then how does that differ from Australia or the USA, or Turkey, or South Africa.
I’m not angry about the job losses (I am one of those lucky ones): But there are lots of people in the UK, who are.
You say that there is no ‘fair’ way of stopping jobs moving abroad. We’ll actually there is.
“Put in leglislation to prevent jobs being moved abroad if they are still required”. Though, I fully accept as technology improves and mergers continue there will be job losses.
However:
It is not fair on any British person (regardless of race etc) that they have to lose their job, when in reality the job still exists.
Is it is fair that jobs are moved abroad, just so companies can squeeze a bit more profit?
I’m pleased that you mentioned AXA because AXA (I have worked for them) were one of the insurers that moved Call Centre and Admin jobs / IT jobs abroad then
the following year they tried to bring them back again.They cannot seem to make up their minds. However the reasons for moving some roles back include the following:
public wanted to deal with English call centres (does this make the public racist? or misinformed? I don’t believe for a second that All ifa’s/AxA Customers are all racist?
IFA’s had enough of dealing with foreign call centres / admin offices – these people are not racist are they?
You will know that companies make a big deal now promoting ‘UK Call Centres’? Are they racist? Of course not. Do you consider someone who will only use UK call centres Racist?
What protection does the Ldemo’s offer for British workers? In general British workers have received little or no protection. Tell me: Where does it end?
There were ladies that I knew at Axa who had worked there for over 20 years doing pension administration on a good wage. Once their role was moved
abroad, they could not find work for their particualar skill and could not afford to pay their mortgages. Do you think that is fair?
I know of lots of programmers who have spent a long time learning their skill (you had commented about British people being lazy) on a salary of around 40K,
only for their jobs to be moved abroad (where on avaerage the salary is 4K).
How do you expect these programmers to pay their mortgages and bills and look after their families. Unfortnately because the money is good – it means they have to try and find a role
where the salary is roughly the same, but you know and I know, these type of roles are hard to find especially as most businesses aim to maximise profit and
pay the cheepest salary (which often means offshoring). Do you think that is fair? What do you suggest to these professional people who have spent most of their lives learning a trade?
I know of another lady who was employed by Allianz as a team leader, she was asked to train ‘some foreign employees’. Once she had trained them up, they (Allianz) then moved her role
abroad and made her redundant (the people she was training was for the role, that she lost). Do you think that is fair? (and no I am not making these stories up)
Your comment “it would be nice if we kept jobs over here”, ‘Nice’ isn’t a word that most people would use. Perhaps “essential” or “fair” would have been more appropriate. If we continue
down the current path – where jobs for British people are not protected, we will be in a right mess. No money being earned, means no taxes means no society (for everyone).
Unemployment is at its highest for 16 years. And none of the main parties have done anything about it.
Yes I have heard of the massacre. Again my point was: You made reference to Saddam Hussein being a danger (and in your opionion we were right to kill him).
My point was that there are lots of people in the world that are dangers but we do nothing about it.(because there is no gain for ourselves)
The reason why we have not invaded China is because they have a Navy, Army and Airforce and Nuclear bombs. Meanwhile Iraq had none of these things.
Especially after the gulf war and in the preceeding years the Iran war (where we were supplying weapons to him, that he used on his own people as well as the Iranians)
Iraq was an easy target and the primary objective was to safeguard our Oil reserves. There was iraq enquiry not so long ago. The UN did not support it.
Regarding your comments about paedophiles, I think this is one for parents to make a decision on?
If you want paedophiles next door to you that is your choice. I do not know any parent or ordinary person who does. We will agree to disagree on reducating these type of people.
With regards to employing foreign doctors. How about we train our own doctors and stop stealing staff from places in which they are needed?
And yes I have read your manifesto. Your party wants the oppurtunity to let the illigal immigrantes who should not be here to stay here.
They have no right – they should not be here in the first place. Australia has the right idea as does the USA.
My point about Turkey was to get it through to you. That just because I support some of the policies of the BNP does not make me racist. or any other BNP supporter?
I have no issues with islam or any other religion, but one thing for sure when I am in Turkey I respect their culture, and try to intergrate.
In the same way I do not tag all Cons as (middle class) or Labs (working class). The issue is that people are coming here are not learning new skills and taking it back to their own country.
What benefit is it for our country or an immigrants country if we are employing easten europeans for ‘fruit picking’ on minimum wage, when a lot of them are ‘degree qualified. The polish people that I know, for example are only in the UK for the money, they have no interest whatsoever in building a life here or mixing with us.
It wasnt long ago that the French people voted for a right wing party. Does that mean that those people all of a sudden become racist?
Its already reported (not by the BNP) that we are taking doctors from third world countries, which is having a negative impact on their own people. How can that be a good thing?
Regarding free speech and the internet –
You’ve mis understood my point completly. You spoke about the internet and free speeech. My point was that ‘free speach’ existed in this country before the internet.
Its worth noting that only 16% of your MP’s actually turned up for that vote, So why did you mention the intenet to begin with? That has nothing to do with the BNP.
You also mentioned ‘hate filled world caused by Right Wing Extremists.’
The twin towers / london bombs (that had nothing to do with the BNP) That was in response to the USA and UK attitude towards the middle east.
The EU membership (agreeing to let in lots of unskilled people into the UK and let British companies move British jobs abroad) had nothing to do with the BNP
The afgan war / Iraq war – (this has nothing to do with BNP)
If you are saying that we live in a world that is created by hate, all of the above was not connected in any way by the BNP or right wing parties.
It was all created by Labour/Cons/Libs. These were all incidents that were caused directly/indirectly from policies created by the British and American political parties (Lib/Lab/Con).
Rgearding the abuse at our troops, You’re using religion as an excuse for their behaviour. It goes a lot deeper than that.
As far as I am concerned they can please themselves.As I said everyone is entitled to their own opionion. But at the same time “Are these people, supposed to be British? and supporting
our troops?”
I dont agree with the war at all – cause neither Iraq or Afghanistan did anything to Britian, but I do not abuse my friends who are serving.
you have to ask yourselve? Do you think it is fair on the soldiers to have to put up with that? How would the libs deal with that?
If religion is the cause, then perhaps the best solution is to become communists. Which, sounds good: Everyone has an equal share and helps each other for the benefit of the state. But
in reality does not work.
Shelters??? – Actually how about we stop giving billions of pounds in aid to foreign countries and use that money to build houses for our homeless people. Even better: in the uk cities I have
lived in Liverpool for example: Whilst there are some nice tidy areas, some districts are in need of a makeover. This may also apply to other city areas. How can anyone justify spending 68
billion pounds on foreign aid, when our cities are in need of some TLC. Do you not think, that by sorting out our own issues first, then the standard of living would go up for everyone.
Here is an idea: We all pay taxes, would it not be possible for a survey to be done or have a proposal form each year, which asks the employee:
Do you want x% of your taxes to go outside the uk?
It would be interesting to see how many people regardless of who they vote for put in a %.
I think that is fair – that people in the UK have a
choice of where they think their money should go.
There are lots of employers out there who do a scheme, where you can donate a % of your wages to a charity. Can we apply this to our taxes?
Segregation already exists. I’ve lived in the following cities. Liverpool, Bristol, London. In Bristol you have Easten, St pauls, montpellerier (which are majority black
and asian). In London I lived in Crofton Park, Near Peckham. Which I will say is majority black. (I never had a problem living there nor did I see any issues – apart from
a couple of shootings) – but that happens everywhere).I did my regular shopping in peckham high street and supported the local businesses. Again colour etc race not the issue at all.
You say you dont want segregation but in reality it already exists. I’m not responsible for this.
I know this because I have lived in areas where I am the ‘minority’and, no I did not have no issues with anyone. Remember it takes two parties to come together and live together, there a lots
of districts in various UK cities where areas are either white/black/asian. People choose either to intregrate or don’t.
South africa is a completley different story. I have not agreed with Apartheid nor have I asked for it.
As far as I am concerned if you are born in this country then you belong here and you should share the same values. But again in the UK this is not the case.
It’s worth noting though, there are lots of South Africans over here now because their country is is in a bit of a mess. Sadly though, the people who are leaving South Africa are the skilled workers (which is good for us – but not good for south africa). I see South Africa ending up in the same mess as Zimbabwae.
If I get your email address at some point I’ll send you an update after I have visited it during June. I’ve kept an open mind for the trip. I’m looking forward to spending my money over there and helping their economy.
Its also worth noting that South African policy is that they put their own people first before offering placements to foreign workers. Do you disagree with this policy?
I do not because I would rather see South Africa become the success it should be and a end to poverty this means they have to put South Africans first
(in the same way I would want us to put the British people first) Race or Religion is not my agenda here at all.
Regarding your comments about BNP people, I know plenty of lab/con/lib supporters who are also racist? whats your point? You cannot attach racism to one party.
Just because you support a particular party or not does not exclude you from being racist.
In fact I know plenty of people (who will support all parties) who would not live in the areas I mentioned in the previous paragraphs above.
Do you remember the ‘toxteth’ riots, the st pauls riots. These were not caused by the BNP were they. Racism exists at every level to some degree (not just BNP) and by all races.
That will never change because we are human. It may be wrong but that is the way it is. I could not give too hoots about where someone comes from or the colour of your skin.
I have said all along: I want to protect British people. (this means all races) and unfortunately no party appears to do this other than the BNP.
Regarding the ‘ordinary people’ comment – (no why should I stop using that word? its a subjective phrase that anybody could use? if you use it I have no issues with that?)
Your definition and use of the word ‘ordinary’ may differ from my opinion, likewise the next person, may have a different opinion of what ‘ordinary’ defines.
Regarding the abuse at the BNP people, So you think its acceptable – for someone that you do not agree with to get abuse.
I’m sure we all have differing opinions – but that does not excuse anyone to behave like that.
Yes I remember question time and to be honest I thought it was a farce.
It wasn’t presented in the normal format. I was actually looking forward to a good debate that night.
To listen to all parties. The majority of questions that night were to do with the past not the present.
Ideally I would like to see all parties have a sensible debate on television.
I do not think Nick Griffen was treated fairly. i.e As I have said before – everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
It actually made the BNP more popular, and it woke up the 3 main parties, would you not agree?
Thanks I do not dislike you at all either. Misinformed – though? Doesn’t that apply to all people. Information from various sources can all be analsysed and understood/interpreted in a number of ways.
Your interpretation and life experiences may differ from mine, that does not mean that either of ours is the correct one.
Politics in general is all about opinion, life experiences, which changes on a daily basis.
Regarding Iran, You’ve sidestepped my original point, My point was what happens in Iran or any other country is their own business. Unless it directly threatens us.
It is not upto ‘you or me’ to decide on how they want to live/govern themselves. And we should not be imposing our ideals onto them.
You have not acknowledged that the main issues in the world today are because “certain countries in the world” try to enforce their own ideas onto other nations that cause the issues.
You have a liberal view, but unfortnately that view is not shared by everyone in every country in the world.
And who are you to decide that it is? or Me? At the end of the day – its for nations to
decide for themselves.
As a side note, what do you think of the UKIP?
Regards
View Comment
Re. Stuart.
I complement you on a well orchestrated positive perception of the BNP. Particularly in identifying that not all who agree with their policies are racist. Having an Asian partner I wouldn’t identify myself as racist, yet the transparency and steadfast nature of the BNP along with policies that benefit ‘me’ a middle age white male that gets my vote.
View Comment
Comments like this make me chuckle, you’re essentially voting to have your partner thrown out the country. Good luck with that.
The BNP has the best political leader since Winston Churchill and, just like Enoch Powell (who, without question has been proved right following his `Rivers of Blood, speech), Nick Griffin has been vilified for simply telling the uncomfortable truth.
Truth which the rest of our traitorous parties do not want us to hear so employ hammer-wielding thugs like the fascist UAF with OUR taxpayers money. We are contributing to our own demise as we hurtle towards becoming an Islamic hell hole.
View Comment
The truth is not spoken any more, for this once proud United Kingdom, Needs a Leader,that will maintain are Christian Values & bring forth the Truth that has been suppressed.
The is no better time to Vote and distance yourself from this ongoing corruption.
Vote BNP for you will hurt those that have abuse you and your Country.
View Comment
Of course people will ‘disappear’ from time to time, this is unpreventable, they will however have ID cards which when applying for a job will have to present this to their employer and if they’re not the correct area the employer will be expected to turn them over the authorities.
What do you suggest? We disallow immigration entirely? You might as well just shoot yourself in the foot.
The Lib Dems manifesto states that if someone has been within the UK for 10 years illegally they will allow them amnesty, this is much better than trying smoke them out.
Yes, I know that ACII is a qualification….Associate Chartered Institute of Insurance(Is it?)? I believe I am in a position to comment on someone’s knowledge of the industry when they make false claims. The point which you keep missing out, over and over again is this – The USA does NOT have universal healthcare (no thanks to the damn Republicans), therefore private healthcare is the only option and in turn the private healthcare companies are able to do as they so please, in contrast to the UK where private healthcare has to compete with the NHS.
Yes, the NHS may not be the best it is, but I still feel it is a must in a first world country. In regards to your dentist comment – I have an NHS dentist, in fact most dentists in my city are NHS still. The NHS simply does not have enough funding, if the government would stop spending so much on our military and spend more money on social aspects we’d be much better off. I agree a reduction in NI should be introduced if you choose to go private instead.
The reason I made a comparison to the BNP is because the BNP are a far right wing party, and far right wing parties more often than enough prefer capitalism, I then compared it to America’s healthcare system as America until recently was a pretty Republican-heavy country.
America’s current healthcare system was brought about via greedy republicans that care about nothing than for themselves, they have this selfish attitude of “Why should my money pay for other people?”, I personally hate that attitude. As a society we have to work together and help each other.
Ah, and so you list countries which have a failed system, USA is the worst one you could possibly use, USA right now is a horribly elitist country – You’d feel right at home there, Australia doesn’t value civil liberties (Censoring internet an awful lot), the main religion in Turkey is Islam, so again, no doubt they’re ruled by authoritarian rule, and South Africa is in a horrible state right now, the amount of segregation on that country is unbelievable. I do hope that when you visit there you see how it really is, and how that system you speak of simply does not work.
How is it fair to stop a company moving abroad? That is not fair at all, that is total authoritarianism, North Korea style. All that would happen is companies would cease to trade in the UK, and the UK economy would be hit.
One of the key principles of a business (Amongst other things) is to make a profit, and if they can make a higher profit by moving abroad they’re going to. I think it’s because the western world is far too rich in comparison to some of the eastern countries and so everything is much more expensive here, so we demand higher wages.
Some people prefer to deal with English call centres as there isn’t as much a language barrier, I personally don’t mind. It does not make them racist, only intolerant. I often find that a lot of English call centre assistants are too cocky, and I find it really offending to speak with some of them, no manners.
I think you need to refresh your memory on the definition of racism as you’re using it far too often in circumstances where it doesn’t apply. It would only be racist if said companies implied that foreign call centres were lower quality because they were not English.
I’m not entirely sure what you mean by ‘protection’, as this could be considered discrimination, but Liberal Democrats treat everyone as equal, regardless of their race/creed/religion. I do not necessarily think it is ‘fair’ per se, however you cannot expect a company, especially in these hard times to continue supplying jobs when they simply cannot afford to.
I also know lots of programmers, and have done programming myself in prior years however I very much doubt that their jobs were moved abroad to people of similar professional level, especially for only £4k. How do I expect them to? I personally don’t expect them to, they will have to try and find ways to, they’re not the only ones unemployed in our current situation. There are plenty of programming roles available, they just have to keep a look out, companies are always looking for computer programmers, and if not they could pursue a consultant career.
I think you are make some of these stories up, they sound far too far fetched and over exaggerated. I don’t believe that the company is allowed to dismiss employees without decent jurisdiction.
No, it would be ‘nice’. You need to get out of this racist perspective of constantly referring to “British” workers, the way I see it all workers are workers regardless of their nationality, stop segregating people.
Easier said than done my friend, I’d love to see you come up with a solution to our current high unemployment, what are you going to do? Pour money into the companies so they have more money to hire people? Oh wait, that wouldn’t work for you as you personally are getting no direct benefit.
Thank you for backing up my points which I had already made about China, and thus disproving your argument. It is clear that you are blinded by your own stubborn ways and will not see clearly any time soon, so there’s no point.
I do not agree to disagree on reduction. I like how you refer to them as paedophiles, even if after their prison term they (may have) learnt their lesson and realised their mistakes.
Again, easier said than done my friend, a lot of British students cannot find the motivation to become doctors, why don’t you go to university and become a GP? If you love Australia or USA so much why don’t you just migrate there? At least there’d be one less right wing maniac to worry about.
By supporting BNP you are saying you’re a racist, end of. The BNP support racist views and ideologies, as has been mentioned many a time BNP membership was, until very recently, exclusively for white British.
I find it awfully surprising that you respect another culture, the way you’ve portrayed yourself, you’re a racist thug.
Then that is the Polish peoples choice and not mine. I have met many Polish and find them to be very nice people on a whole, they’re very polite. If a lot of them are ‘degree’ qualified then they need to take the initiative to seek higher level jobs.
A lot people in France are very ignorant and stubborn, you’d probably feel at home there as well.
If you could show me these reports, and prove that they are reliable sources I may take your point seriously.
I think you misunderstand the first point I ever made and that was with free speech ON the internet, yes free speech existed before the internet I never refuted that (However the so called ‘free speech’ was very limited, as Britain was much more right wing).
16% of ‘my’ MPs maybe only turned up, but everyone of them voted against the bill. It has got to do with the BNP, as the BNP are the sort of party which spreads political propaganda through the internet and censors anti-BNP messages, think China.
Aha, but tell me this, Republicans are a right wing party are they not? I did not say that the BNP had anything to do with it, as they are not the only right wing party on Earth. I honestly cannot see your point on the EU membership, the EU membership was more of a left wing decision and a good decision it was. The afghan / Iraq was is, again, to do with greedy right wing Republicans.
Oh you’re right there, I forgot that the Republicans were extreme left wing. Conservatives are a right wing party, not sure if you realised that. The BNP had nothing to do with it because they’re such a meagre party that no one takes their word seriously.
I am not using religion as an excuse for the behaviour, I am simply saying that it is a major contributing factor.
I never said they were British or supporting our troops, I’m not sure where your assumptions are coming from.
As I have stated previous many a time and I’m getting tired of repeating myself..In fact, just go read the manifesto or my previous comments, there’s no point in looping.
Communism actually works quite well, I just feel China isn’t doing it the best way, they’re censoring their peoples far too much and taking away civil liberties.
We spend money on foreign aid as we’re an international country and we need to be seen on the international level. The reason why many areas are in need of some makeovers is because people are not taking pride in the area they live in, this has very little to do with the government.
I think this is quite a good idea, the sentence starting “Here is an idea:….”, I think this could work quite well if put into practice. The Liberal Democrats want to give more power to the people, one of the key powers is the ability to sack your MP if you feel he is doing a bad job.
I know segregation already exists, and that’s why we need to work hard to reduce it and not feed it, I never said you personally were responsible for it, not sure where you got that idea from. Which is why we need to educate people on integration, and educate people to understand and respect other cultures.
The UK is an international country, and you simply cannot say “As far as I am concerned if you are born in this country then you belong here….”, as not everyone will want to share the same values, I don’t share the same values as you do, I prefer dynamism.
Not entirely sure where you’re going with this SA argument however.
I’m afraid I won’t be sharing personal details with you.
Yes, I disagree with that policy, I feel that is really discriminating against foreign workers which want to make a life in said country.
I understand that some Liberal Democrat supporters may be racist, however the BNP leader himself is a racist that does not speak very highly of the party, and when you are supporting him, you’re being racist yourself.
The Toxeth riots were caused by racial tensions, I find it awfully convenient that a year later the BNP was formed however. Again, this tension will only continue to simmer so long as people allow it to. Imagine how racist people were 100 years ago compared to now, think about another 100 years. I hope that one day we reach a point where everywhere is so multicultural that race is not an issue.
Ordinary people vote for Liberal Democrats.
I did not think it is acceptable, I simply said that it is clear that the BNP is very much disliked.
Of course you would think question time was a farce, it wasn’t in favour of your party. The reason the questions were to do with the past is because Nick Griffin has said some hideous things that are unforgivable.
It made the BNP more infamous, not popular. And I’m not sure what you mean by ‘woke up’.
Regarding Iran – This is the selfish attitude I hate, the whole “It doesn’t affect us, so why bother?” approach. Iran need international intervention right now, it’s a wild place.
I never said it was ‘up to me’, their own people hate their own government, I’m supporting them in that, their own people want democracy.
I have acknowledged this as I referred to Religion causing a lot of today’s wars, and when countries force their religion upon another country.
It is sad that more do not have a liberal view, I feel we could really make this world a better place if we did.
And UKIP – They’re just more or less a less extreme BNP, I tried reading their policies/manifesto but it’s still not available which is annoying.
View Comment
Hello Charlie,
Thanks for your responses.
First of all, why am I racist thug, because I use the word British? I have a British passport. As I have explained in previous posts, my grandfather who is Czech, is Czechoslovakian. Is my granddad a racist thug because he refers to being Czech. How would you describe yourself?
I’ve explained that as far as I am concerned people who are born here are British. In the same way if I was born in Ireland I would be ‘Irish’ or if I was born in Russia then I would be Russian.
Not sure what your issue is with France, but lots of people in the UK go there for holidays and we trade with the French, do we not? But I guess you do not want to trade with the French cause in your words “ignorant and stubborn”
Next up was Australia. I’ve been there, it is a wonderful country and the quality of life is really good. I guess you don’t like Australians either. I have no issues with the Ozzies, always good to have some banter with them. I can’t relocate there unfortunately because the job I do in the UK is specialised in the UK insurance industry and is not available overseas. That may change – depends on the software used abroad though. My father lived there for 15 years though, and even he admits the quality of life is better there than the UK.
The same applies to the USA. The people are really friendly, well worth a visit. Even though they are in your words ‘damn republicans’.
The amusing thing is you have slated quite a lot of people from all over the world, if it wasn’t for them; chances are you might not be here at all today.
Finally on your travels you spoke about Iran. In your opinion it’s a ‘wild’ place but in reality its fine. I have no issues with Iran or their people, so I would prefer we didn’t have a war with them.
Your comments about the Polish. I didn’t say they were not friendly, what I said was that “they have no interest in mixing with us.” Regarding the fruit picking – as explained I’ve lived all around the UK and the polish girl who I shared a house with (this was many years ago) The English employer, was taking the piss out of them. Basically – Slave labour – I took the time to help her go through her contract because despite having a degree, her English was not the best. I’ll confirm that the employer was taking advantage of her and the fact that she was in a new country. I am sure that this is something of an issue all around the UK. She was under the false impression that England was a land of ‘gold’. I think she has found out otherwise.
Like her there are lots of intelligent eastern Europeans that have roles over here, which traditionally would be taken up by those who perhaps do not have a degree and cannot seek to be a doctor or computer consultant.
If you speak with her, all she is interested in is money. Once she had enough then she would go back to Poland to buy things there. Why, because she could get better value for money. I don’t blame them for coming over here, by the way. I would do the same.
She was nice, however her other Polish friends, were taking the piss, when it came to respecting our laws. Especially the insurance scams. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-472377/Eastern-Europeans-cause-15-cent-fatal-accidents-rural-roads.html
I have spoken briefly in other posts about the ‘no insurance’ or vehicle tax. That not fair. And it is not a small percentage either.
It’s all about ‘Money’ not integration as you seem to want to believe. That why we all have different countries, each with our own cultures and views.
Turkey is a really good country with lots of culture. Why do you find it strange that I like culture? I have no issues with culture, but it’s recognised that some cultures do not mix well at all.
Turkey is a secular country by the way. They hope to join the EU very soon, but speaking with my Turkish friends, some believe that the EU may have a negative effect on their wages. For example the guys who run the restaurants work 14 hours a day, 7 days a week for around 9 months. Once the tourist season is over, they then return to their hometowns with their money. One of the issues that they have is that ‘maximum’ working hours will be imposed on them; this will have the effect of:
Restaurants / hotels will have to hire more staff
This will then affect the prices of goods and services, and will make Turkey more expensive, which will then drive down tourism. Which would create unemployment and could affect their economy.
Guess what will happen next. That’s right they will want to come over to the UK. I can’t blame them, I would do the same. People from the UK are considered to be very well off indeed, but we know otherwise.
Why do they want to come to England? It’s all to do with money.
As you’ve stated you think ‘communism’ should work. I think you should have a chat with the Poles and the Czechs and ask them about how it ruined their countries. It’s a good idea but it has failed everywhere: Why, because humans by nature will always want more than the next person. That hasn’t changed since the dawn of time, nor will it in the future.
Health Care USA
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2010/03/how_the_healthcare_debate_has.html
We’ve both given our opinion. As I said in my last post. The health care system was not invented by right wing politics. The USA has had a history where parties from the left and right side have been in power.
However, the link above lots of Americans discussing the pros and cons. There is even a post from a UK person who has also compared it against the UK. Like I said in previous posts, I was adding some balance to your views.
Your comment about ‘Private’ Healthcare in the UK having to compete with the NHS is not accurate. People in this country from ‘all walks of life’ are forced into using Private Healthcare because the NHS is not working.
Nobody wants to pay for the same service twice, do they?
This includes my mother, who was a qualified nurse for over 40 years, who required an operation for a trapped nerve in her shoulder. On the NHS the waiting list was over a year, so she paid to go “Private” it was done in a few weeks. Amusing thing was – the consultant she saw both from the NHS and the Private hospital was the same person.
Thanks for your input regarding the insurance industry and my stories. So I have attached a few links to some of the insurers that I have worked for. As I said in my previous post – I’m lucky, the jobs moved abroad had not affected me personally, but it has affected without doubt lots of other UK people.
It’s worth noting though that some of the people I know didn’t have all the qualifications in the world, but they did put in a ‘hard days graft’ working shifts and weekends. I’m disappointed that your comments regarding finding UK call centre staff rude, cocky etc…. maybe it was your attitude towards them, though you so have an in-depth knowledge of the industry to realise all calls are monitored and that if you have a complaint then you can do so.
F or a number of years there is the insurance times award, strange that the UK call centres for Fortis get the votes for bring the best for customer service. It is chosen on evidence and done via votes from the UK itself, this includes customers and brokers.
As you seem to know about insurance. Then you can explain to the rest of the world. The UK stance regarding ‘number of adults’ in a household. In respect of taking out ‘household’ insurance. I’ll think you will find after your research, UK insurance companies do not want to insure houses with more than 6 adults in them. Why? Cause of the fraudulent claims. Who do you think this stance is aimed at? I’ll give you a clue. It’s not aimed at British people. Statistics show from an Underwriting perspective that these types of risks are ‘high risk’. I guess you do not think that is fair but at the same time I do not think it is fair either from an insurer’s perspective or a customer perspective that I have to pay an additional premium to cover these types of claims. It also affects you and everybody else in the UK.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3329807.stm
Aviva move jobs over to India
Lloyds TSB
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3256454.stm
Axa move jobs abroad
https://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=10948
Prudential move jobs abroad
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2305135.stm
RSA move jobs abroad
https://www.cengage.com/
RBS move jobs abroad
All of these jobs existed in the UK. There was no protection for British Workers. So no my stories are not made up. And I do not see the issue of protecting the people in the UK regardless of race.
Your comments regarding IT,” I doubt any IT jobs could be done abroad as professionally as in the UK”. Well – you are wrong – India for example has the latest technology and I work with two Indian programmers, I have no issues with their work or quality of it or them from a personal perspective. I personally do not have an issue with communication either. Loops and Switch statements all the same regardless of where you are from.
I know of one software house that has a contract with all insurers, they also moved IT work abroad, but after a while it wasn’t working as well as it could be. There was an issue with communication and also lack of understanding of the UK insurance industry, so they bring the guys over from India and put them into accommodation and then once the work is complete – they return home. Believe it or not: It’s still actually cheaper than employing a programmer from the UK.
Average salary of a programmer in India
The only reason why jobs have been moved abroad is as I have said to make more profit. In my eyes it is not fair to have roles moved abroad, if they still exist in the UK. Neither did the trade unions.
All we had from the parties….”We’re disapointed……”
I still cannot understand your logic or stance on why you think it is fair or good for our economy for a UK based company to transfer a UK job (which can be held by a British person from any ethnic background), when there is still a need for that role. It just means another person on the dole.
It doesn’t do our economy any good whatsoever. You have to remember that a lot of insurance companies have merged over the years, which meant mass redundancies, so all that they are trying to achieve is more profit. I realise that you say that companies cannot afford to, well in the case of insurance..
Insurers make profits each year without fail. The profits they make are generally in the millions, which are then re-invested. So your excuse that they cannot afford to employ UK people is complete rubbish.
Brokers complaining about call centres abroad. The causes: Communication and the service is not as good as you say it is. For example: Have you tried to underwrite a complex motor fleet policy or perhaps a commercial combined policy. Customers (which include brokers and commercial clients eg Tradesmen, Garage Owners, shop owners) they want to deal with UK based insurance people, who have an understanding of the UK and its risks/culture.
Insurance is about understanding the ‘risk’ and the moral/physical hazards. This is something that cannot be understood unless you are in the environment and understand how the UK operates. Both from a law and regulatory perspective. Which is why in the ACII, we study UK law not ‘foreign’ law.
Aviva bring back jobs to the uk
https://www.rediff.com/money/2004/apr/20bpo1.htm
If you read my post. Then I said that I had lived in Bristol and had worked for Axa. See above. This building is at the AXA centre, opposite the parkway station.
Like I said, brokers/ifas complained as well as customers. As things stand at Axa, they cannot make up their minds. This doesn’t do the economy in this country any favours as employees can’t keep on relocating around the UK every 6 months. And as the number of insurers in the UK has fallen by 50% it’s almost impossible trying to find another job.
I think that basically sums up my comments about the insurance industry and what has happened. There is nothing racist at all regarding those topics above, just facts.
Don’t worry though cause in the next year or so there are going to be even more job losses in the UK. You’ll be pleased to know that I doubt very much the ‘outsourced’ centres will be affected.
Regarding your comments about the Toxteth riots. I’m sure you may have read my posts, I was born in Liverpool. The riots were not racial at all. There were white and black and every other colour you can think of – fighting because they were tired of what had happened to the areas, the lack of support from the political parties etc. There were also small riots in places like ‘cantril farm’. You can google that if you want.
Race is always used as an excuse to cover up the deeper issues. Basically failed politics cause the issues.
Your comment about blaming the people for not keeping the areas tidy, well actually it’s due to a number of things.
Houses being reprocessed – because people were losing their jobs.
Businesses going bankrupt and not being supported by the governments in power
The government or the council not supporting the people in Liverpool.
House owners not having the income to be able to spend on the upkeep of their house.
.
In my post I also spoke about stealing Medical Staff from third world countries, was having an impact. You asked for a report
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4349545.stm
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2613146/
Whilst it has benefited us – it has a negative impact on the people from the ‘immigrants’ homeland. How can you see this as a positive? Your comment ‘ I hate this us……attitude”
Make up your mind, because you are benefiting from these doctors/nurses etc but other people suffer at your gain. Just because you cannot see the suffering does not mean it doesn’t exist.
I have a better idea – we can train our own people. It just takes some effort. I realise in your opinion our UK students are lazy and cannot be motivated, I beg to differ.
If our students are that lazy, then there is no need to reduce class sizes and spend money on education as your party leader has suggested. By the sounds of it – we are all doomed!
Next up was Religion. In all of my posts, I have stated that I don’t care about religion. But however there a lots of people who do and this will never change. Religion has its good points though as it can bring communities together, it just appears that for some religions though, this will not work.
Under a liberal government – would you abolish all the faith schools? I get the impression that lots of people under all faiths are going to be upset.
You spoke about educating people – we’ve already have diversity rammed into our heads. To be honest I do not think it was needed.
I remember in my infant school, we did our nativity plays and all children of all faiths joined in. Nowadays, though you have to be careful of what you say or do, because it might be offensive. People are told not to send Christmas Cards because it might offend other people – that’s just how ridiculous things have become over years.
I don’t think education will work because you cannot change thousands of years of culture overnight and lots of people want to remain as they are. I have no issue with that.
But a good start if you truly believe its an education issue, would be to ban the ‘faith’ schools and have all children of all faiths in a single school. At least they will get the chance to mix, rather than each going their own separate paths. But then there has to be a single common value that each person can relate to and share.
I’m pleased that we have ironed out our differences of the word “ordinary”; you say that ordinary people vote for Liberal Democrats. So does that mean the other 80% of the UK are not ordinary?
Like I said before, you cannot judge a person solely based on politics as politics changes. The Lib dem policies have certainly changed over the years, I have noticed a slightly harder stance.
It’s a shame you don’t agree with South Africa and you don’t want to share details. Even if you were to provide a dummy email address. I would have kept you updated during my trip. One thing I’m looking forward to is visiting Soweto. (Looking forward – is probably the wrong word to use, but you know what I mean).
No doubt I will be shown that they have a shortage of doctors and qualified medical staff, but again you favour this. I’ll explain to those people… “don’t worry cause your doctors and nurses are all in the UK and Europe now and we’re very healthy…. thanks!”
I’m surprised you didn’t support the stance on the South African people looking after their own people first, but I guess that from your opinion this also means that the South Africans are intolerant and racist also.
Your comments about ‘Iraq’. Sorry I was being sarcastic, I cannot believe as does the rest of the world including the Americans, that you do not think Oil was the primary objective.
http://www.thedebate.org/thedebate/iraq.asp
You’re very passionate about being in the EU. So to balance your views a bit:
https://www.economicshelp.org/europe/disadvantages-eu/
https://econ.economicshelp.org/2007/04/essay-plan-arguments-for-leaving-eu.htm
Both links are kept in simple English for those who don’t have an in-depth understanding.
I’m pleased we reached a middle ground concerning donations abroad. I’ve suggested it on the BBC website as a question for the parties to consider.
I hope you watched the last debate the other night. It’s a shame that apparently we have lots of terrorists in Somalia who want to hurt us?
These were the words spoken from Gordon Brown. The interesting thing was that neither Nick Clegg nor David Cameron objected to this. So what happens when we invade Somalia then?
And then we invade Iran (the Wild Place in your words), and Yemen.
We’ve got lots of those nationalities here in Britain now, which is what you want. You want a multiculuture socity whoses values are so wide from each to other at times it causes issues. Its a recipe for diaster, especially as our contry continues on the path of war torwards the islamic nations.
Do you think that these people are going to support military action? Do you think that any of these people, will be prepared to join our forces and fight against their home countries?
Interesting times lay ahead I think. Regardless of who wins the election!
Regards
View Comment
protectionism and imigration has been on the agenda for years, but what has acctually been done about it ?it was released last week on talk sport that the labour government deliberately brought 2 million people into this country in the last 10 years to do the work that we would not do .with 3 million people unemployed that is crazy
View Comment