I posted a message in here earlier - has it been removed for a reason?? It was a positive one, nothing shocking in it!

Under the Tories, Britain suffered

- Boom and bust economies
- Workers legally paid a pittance on just £1.20 an hour
- Child poverty doubled
- Chronic under investment in our schools and hospitals
- 3 million unemployed

Hmmmm

Under Labour
-------------

- Boom and Bust economy
- Workers pensions legally plundered
- Workers income legally plundered due to abolishion of 10p rate of tax
- Highest petrol duty paid at the pump ever

No difference. The future for Britain is picking up the pieces of 11 years of economic mismanagement that our the younger generation and their children will have to live with.

It's a shame we are feeling just as disgruntled about this government as the last tory lot. You are correct for highlighting the similarities.

Brown and co should feel totally ashamed of themselves. They have no idea how tough the daily standard of living is. I've said it before and I'll say it yet again...Stop spitefully attacking the hard working people. TAX THE RICH and stop wasting taxpayers billions on consultancy fees when common sense is more effective and a lot cheaper.
Brown and co. Shape up or ship out!
.

Almost eleven years ago the conservative government was overthrown the Labour Party’s victory in the 1997 general election. Man! It felt good to be alive! On the morning of the Friday after the results were declared I remember driving to work filled with euphoria: finally the arrogant, corrupt and incompetent Tories had been ousted and defeated. Labour had achieved a landslide! We put our trust in the new administration and held our breaths expectantly, waiting on tender hooks, for the promised new age of decency and social justice to be ushered in. Yet within a few months it began to go awry. Armed with a stupefying majority of supine, self-satisfied and acquiescent MPs Blair cut the heart out of the Labour party which immediately stopped being socialist: stopped being left wing: stopped being left of centre: stopped being anything at all. Within a mere decade the Labour Party has degenerated to the point where its latest housing minister Caroline Flint can, after a fortnight in her job and doubtless minutes of mature analysis and reflection, float a policy initiative expressly designed to enshrine in law a power to evict unemployed council house tenants from their homes leaving them destitute and starving on the street. This pernicious policy is supposed to encourage a “something for something society” and to “help the unemployed” according to Ms. Flint. Apparently “...council hosing will always remain... as a safety net...". Flint seems to have noticed that unemployment is disproportionately high amongst council tenants, coincidentally often some of the poorest and most disadvantaged people in society, but is seemingly blind to the bald facts that under her successive political masters Blair and Brown homelessness has more than doubled and that one and a half to two million people have been languishing on council house waiting lists semi-permanently for years or that, despite a desperate need for social housing and promises made by her party that much more would be built, New Labour has commissioned the least quantity of social housing since records began. Here are a couple of other facts that Flint seems ignorant of: homelessness was less and social house building more under the conservatives than it has been under New Labour! As a lifetime Labour voter, up to the last general election that is, I find Flint’s proposal as repulsive as it is inhumane but revelatory as per the unimaginative and icy “mind set” New Labour apparatchiks all seem to possess. Moving on consider New Labour’s schools minister Jim Knight? Heard of him? No? Apparently Mr. Knight recently stated that he considers classes of up to SEVENTY children "perfectly acceptable" provided more than one teacher or one teacher and a couple of teaching assistants are present in the room at the same time! Try selling class sizes of SEVENTY to the electorate at the next general election and see whether parents with children being educated in the state system find Mr. Knight’s premise “perfectly acceptable” or not! Armies recruited from the ranks of the ordinary working people and enlightened middle classes of the UK – people who supported the Labour party through thick and thin, financially and otherwise - appalled by what the government has done, is doing, plans to do and has become are walking away from the Labour Party in droves. Yet, as I sit typing these words into my computer’s browser, the saddest event I can remember personally was the premature death of John Smith, a good man and fully paid up member of the human race whose broad intellect and compassionate heart might have made all of our futures a lot brighter and more worthy; everything could have been so different if only Smith had not been lost. In another version of history in which Smith was elected to be Prime Minister of our nation we might have been spared the sleaze, pettiness, nastiness, deceit, delusion, war, injustice and infinite series of crushing disappointments that Blair and Brown inflicted on us, as well as the promotions of amoral characters like Flint and Knight to positions of significance beyond their capabilities.

Under the Tories - Britain suffered - I agree. With Labour, Britain has got better - I disagree.

Is crime truly down? Do we record all the drunken behaviour in our towns now, do the figures reflect massively improved security on cars i.e. car thefts harder, do the figures reflect the loss of confidence in the police to the point where we no l;onger report less critical offences.

Record numbers of people are in work - yet too many jobs are in a fragile service sector with limited skills/prospects. Kids, especially young men have too few jobs capable of giving them a sense of pride/achievement

I could go on but why is it that I suspect everything I am told by labour these days - I feel like the child in "The Emporers new clothes"

Well, now I've heard everything. New Labour seems to be determined to reduce working class council house tenants to the level of medieval serfdom. I speak of Caroline Flynt's audacious plan to throw unemployed men, women and families out of their council houses and only note from council houses if they cannot satisfy the clerks at their local job centre that they are actively seeking work. A simple mistake could see such people evicted and ejected onto the street. Very progressive. What I wanted to hear from her was that Labour would be committing itself to a massive programme of social house building, not that it intended once again to demonise and piliory the poorest and most helpless people in society. And as per usual the whole sorry announcement was wrapped in a cliche: "... something for something society". That a female member of the Labour Party could be capable of devising and arguing the case for so cruel and wicked a policy is extraordinary. I don't believe Flynt is suggesting that this perfidious policy is applied to unemployed people in housing association, privately rented or privately mortgaged homes, in which the occupiers receive housing benefit or help with their mortgage interest payments while unemployed. Her sole focus is on council tenants. I thought Labour stood for fairness and equity. More and more it seems the Labour party stands for nothing anymore, least of all natural justice. All my life I have voted for the Labour party in every election local and general. No more. Now I will be voting for any party other than the Conservatives most likely to keep the Labour candidate out. Shame on all of you Labour MPs for passively supporting your leaders through thick and thin. I would begin polishing up my CV if I were you: in a couple of years most of you, including Ms. Flynt, will certainly be looking for other jobs.

Poor old Caroline Flint. It's Edwina Curry and Ann Widdecome all over again isn't it? - i.e., a case of a minor and almost unnoticeable female politician trying to win herself a higher profile by being controversial. And where are the two aforementioned harpies now? In high office? Globe trotting? Doing good? Saving the world? No. These awful women are reduced to spending their days writing unreadable novels and spasmodically appearing, in bit parts, on shows like Hell's Kitchen, Loose Women and Have I got News For You. Don't worry about Caroline Flint. She's already scotched any nominal chance of significant advancement as a politician by making an exhibition of herself trailing her coat about her desire to throw unemployed and poor out of their homes and on to the street. You must know in your heart this isn't a serious policy that the Labour Party could ever sponsor, it's simply a stupid idea put forward by a very stupid woman in an attempt to court favour with a robotic and cold hearted leader - like a dog begging for scraps from its master.

How utterly foolish. You see, in a democracy it isn't the market or politicians that ultimately decide on what is fair but the electorate. It was corruption and a litany of petty cruelty that blighted the Conservatives and doomed them to over a decade in the wilderness. The same thing is now beginning to happen to the whole sorry New Labour project. Still, as they say, "What goes around comes around".

I just can't get over Ms. Flint's proposal. A lot of council house tenants are unemployed so what does New Labour want to do? Provide transport so these people can travel to work affordably? Set up educational and training centres in and around troublesome estates to reskill these unfortunate people? Set up govenment sponsored work programmes, paying idle people real wages to do useful work in and around these decaying areas? Inject the cash necessary ito these communities and housing stock to regenerate the area? No. New Labour's solution: threaten these underdogs with homelessness and destitution if they fail to toe the line. This policy is beneath contempt and should be beneath every decent Member of Parliament's consideration. Shame on Caroline Flint! Shame on Gordon Brown, who MUST have "green lit" this pernicious policy. Shame on the hollow shell that used to be the Labour Party. Shame on you all.

No to long ago I put up on here about Labour stance they have lowered employment, when I look around me I see people who might be working but working at what, I see men and women working at three four jobs and yet earn nothing a pittance.

The ONS the Office of National statistics and the unemployment office are so far part in facts somebody is telling fiction.

Inactivity means any person below working age who does not have a job, be they to rich, to poor or have saving who for what ever reason cannot claim benefits.

Labour changed the rules in 1997 which in one stroke removed 3 million people from the unemployment figures. Now Labour are saying we have less then 1.5 million people unemployed, but what they mean is we have 1.5 million people claiming JSA. now if you lose your job and get a payment for your job loss or have saving or have a family member who works you cannot get benefits, you might register for work as do 4.5 million people but the are not counted,

I mean talk about cheating it's scam, 4.5 million people have registered for work but cannot claim benefits, plus the 1.5 million who do claim benefits we have 6 million people unemployed add this to the 10 million people who are sick or disabled and we have 16 million.

Labour has spent about 1 billion getting so they say 23,000 people back to work, out of this they say 2,000 disabled people have returned, but I ask would these 2.000 people have returned anyway.

I think what we need to know is what are the real facts, here is one for you, Labour says they have 666,000 jobs available in the UK, we all know we have about 1 million immigrants who we are told have come here to work and yet the jobless totals did not move, except the total at the Job center which went from 660,000 down to 360,000, Labour are saying this is not in fact right, I know which I believe because it sound and looks right. Labour has used the figures for unemployment since 1999 it has to have moved even if it's up wards.

I think we have had enough lies and targets we need facts and the Truth.

All you say here is true. I would say one thing about immigrant workers however. Often we here things like "A million Poles came to the UK and found jobs, why can't own own unemployed find work." Well, the average age of a Polish imigrant is twenty four years old. These people are, for the most part very physically fit, uncomplaining and exteremly mobile: they travel nomadically to wherever work exists, generally live in poor conditions and work all the hours god sends for a pittance. British men and women in their thirties, forties, fifties and sixties, often with families, are neither mobile nor physically up to hard manual labour these young immigrants undertake. What good is a job picking cabbages in Devon to a fifty five year old female ex-office worker in London with dependents? The majority of Poles also go back home at some point: even they wouldn't put up with the poor conditions they live under in the UK forever. Once they've earned a nest egg they return to their native land. But I would agree with Treborc that the labour and unemployment statistics have been shamelessly distorted. Officially a "full time job" is no longer a five-day forty-hour week but any job that employs someone for 16.5 hours or more per week!

The calibre of ministers and secretaries of state under Gordon Brown fills me with despair. A couple of examples of the "new breed" might be Gordon's old mucker the smiley Ed Balls (Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families)and the mother of his three children partner Yvette Cooper (Housing Minister). Neoptism anybody? When you look at these insubstantial, full-time, professional politicians do they inspire you with trust and confidence? Does Ms. Cooper look like the kind of firebrand that will stand up to Gordon Brown and fight for the monies needed to tackle the housing crises? Does Mr. Balls appear to be the capable character who will sort out once and for all our failing and ailing educational system? Uh-oh! The UK fell from 8th in 2003 to 24th in maths in 2006 and 7th to 17th in reading over the same period - both rankings make the UK's performance average for OECD countries. And Ed Balls is the man to rectify this. I don't think so.

The future of Britain...

... I would expect more erosion of liberties, more political interference in criminal investigations and more ministers refusing to accept that they have done anything wrong (£103,000 anyone?)...

All parties become corrupted by being in power for too long. It's time to go.

You're right of course. I reckon that the very best that the Labour party can hope for is a hung parliament after the next general election. But if they lost completely would the "New Conservatives" under David Cameron be any better. I don't think so; not even slightly. There are too many innacuracies and inconsistencies in what they say and how they behave for my liking. For example the Tories have always said that they'd scrap Labour's failing and ailing New Deal programme and use the money saved to boost the poorest and most elderly pensioner's incomes. But recently they've announced a new "forced labour" programme (based on ideas culled from the state of Wisconsin in the USA and Australia, both of which have very low population densities) which they intend to implement that sounds even more of a "dog's dinner" and far more expensive to administer than Labour's tawdry New Deal. Where's the money for that coming from for that? Remember the announcement at the Tory party conference vis-a-vis cutting inheritence tax? This proved inexplicitly popular considering it wouldn't be applicable to 94% of the population and was based on extremely dodgy data and statisics informally gleaned from data accumulated by the Scottish Widows Fund and Life Assurance Society in Edinburgh. Subsequent analyses show that that the Conservatives were wildly incorrect in their massively optimistic calculations and that fewer than 6% of the population would actually benefit from the policy if implemented as it had been stated. Looking abroad for ideas, which both paries are fond of doing seemingly having no original ideas of their own, we observe that in America Bush froze the minimum wage for over nine years, leaving it to wither and die on the vine, bringing misery to the poorest working men and women in that country. Is that the kind of thing we can expect to see under a David Cameron premiership? I think yes. Under a Tory administration will Tax Credits be frozen, cut or completely abolised? May be. Will the old age pensioners lose their free TV licenses and winter fuel payments? Probably not. The greatest thing the Tories have got going for them is that they are NOT the Labour Party who have abandoned and been abandoned by their natural constituency among the working and enlightened middle classes. Labour is stale: the Conservatives half-baked: the Liberal Democrats utterly irrevelant outside of a hung parliament. Does it really matter any more who we vote for or even if we bother to vote at all? Millions of people now believe that it doesn't. How sad.

This Christmas I witnessed the spectacle of a Conservative shadow housing minister voluntarily spending a night on the streets to draw attention to homelessness and general lack of affordable social housing after ten years of government by New Labour. So now the conservatives care more about the underprivileged and the homeless than the Labour party! You couldn’t make it up could you? Under Blair and Brown homelessness has more than doubled while social house building programmes have plummeted to their lowest level since records began; over 96% of first time buyers cannot now mortgage even the cheapest properties in their area. Social house building was higher and homelessness 100% lower under Thatcher and Major than under Blair and Brown! What an absolutely shameful legacy for two “Labour” leaders who pretend to own smatterings of social conscience.

Poor old John Prescott (remember him?) toured the radio and television studios before “New Labour” gained power in 1997 boasting that the capital receipts from council house sales would be released to build the “affordable rented accommodation” that was “so desperately needed”. I don’t blame John Prescott for promulgating this out and out lie; I think the poor old duffer really believed that social housing would be near the top of Labour’s agenda once they were returned to power. More than anyone else - even more than the arch and crypto-conservative Blair - I blame Gordon Brown for the woes now suffered by the homeless. After eighteen years of Thatcherism the downtrodden looked to him more than anyone to deliver equity and social justice and instead received only hectoring lectures about “rights and responsibilities” et al. (I bet Brown will be taking this cliché out of mothballs again in the future. Watch out for it! Whenever Gordon traipses out this tired old maxim it is always prelude to some announcement which reduces every citizen’s “rights” and heaps a mass of unjustifiable “responsibilities” on to their bowed but unbroken shoulders.) For example men and women (over the age of sixteen!) now have the responsibility to travel up to three hours to a minimum wage job but have no right to expect to be able to secure a home fit for them to live in. Obviously the poorest in our society cannot and will never be able to mortgage a property and now, because housing benefit has been capped at too low a level to enable those eking out a miserable existence on the minimum wage to meet unregulated market rents, cannot afford to rent a private property, even if awarded extra monies derived from the slew of arcane means tested tax credits and sundry top-ups that are temporarily available. On top of this such unfortunates have virtually no chance of winning a council house or housing association tenancy because such properties are in incredibly short supply and therefore rarely become vacant. Thanks to Gordon Brown the poorest and most helpless men, women and children in our society have been ignored and abandoned as far as housing goes by a political party that was created to stand up for them and take steps to improve their lives. Millions of men and women are now forced to live at home with their parents until their thirties, forties…indefinitely! Three and four generations of the same family are often now forced to live under the same roof. Hundreds of thousands of decent and hard-working families have been reduced to living in one furnished room and sharing a kitchen and bathroom with strangers. No wonder teenagers binge drink and take proscribed drugs: any kind of escape from such a miserable existence must be a temptation under such terrible living conditions even for only a few hours. No wonder crime is escalating: what have people got to lose if they have nothing of value that can be taken away from them?

I do not believe not even for one instant that the robotic, pitiless and remote figure of Gordon Brown cares one jot about such suffering but even from an economic standpoint his current housing policy is nonsense. Why? Without a sufficient supply affordable housing for PURCHASE AND RENTAL you end up with an insufficiently mobile workforce. Vacancies will not be promptly filled because men, women and families will be unable to move from one location to another to take up these various positions!

What has happened to the Labour Party? How could its elected MPs and activists – the handful that are left that is – have passively stood by while their leaders committed them collectively to policies of such ignorance and systemic wickedness? Food, drink and shelter used to be considered by the Labour Party to be basic human rights both at home and abroad but apparently no longer feature in Gordon Brown’s “vision” of the United Kingdom in the twenty first century. Brown must be looking into the future with his good eye closed: unlike Nelson who did much the same thing on the eve of his greatest battle it is cowardice and not bravery that motivates him to do so.

Long term unemplyed people should not be allowed to vote. That way only the productive people can shape the political landscape. Votes for parties that promise better state hand outs will be avoided thus producing a productibe Britain.

Interesting ideas Simon but not new ones. Nazi Germany implemented many of the policies you advocate and achieved zero unemployment; they also had a few interesting ideas about dealing with foreigners, ethnic and other groups they disapproved of usually involving forced labour and murder. If you think coming on to a forum like this and having a right-wing rant will persuade people to vote Conservative you're even crazier than your semi-literate posts seem to indicate. The Conservatives wouldn't want to be associated with a loony like you in a million years! It's people like you that earned them a bad name! Keep taking the tablets and I hope you get better soon.

Well said sir ,Well said, but do you think this idiot is a Tory more likely BNP.

Yes. You're probably correct Treborc. It never crossed my mind that Simon might be a BNP sympathiser because the BNP never crosses my mind as being a genuine political party with sane, humane and progressive policies. I've never voted for the Conservative but take this opportunity to apologise to them for inadvertently linking them with the aforementioned "goose stepping" character.

Well, things are not looking too good for any of us are they?

First, Gordon gets all coy about holding a general election. "Will he, won't he, will he, won't he, won't he join the dance?"

Then the Tories announce a planned reduction in inheritance tax, which would only affect 6% of the population in any case, win back some points in the opinion polls on the back of this and Gordon gets cold feet. "I want to show people my vision," he claims. How silly of him to continue to insist that he never seriously considered calling a general election and that the opinion polls played no part in it.

Next, within five days of the Tory initiative, Alistair Darling announces that New Labour were going to reduce inheritance tax in a similar fashion to the Conservatives and that his announcement of this policy had nothing to do with the Conservatives but had been planned by him, independently and beforehand.

Then the Tories say they're going to get "tough" with the unemployed. So what do New Labour do? - they announce that not only are they going to get "tough" with the unemployed but that they're going to get even tougher with the physically and mentally ill claimants of incapacity benefit as well.

(What's with this competition between the parties vying with each other in an effort to be the nastiest and the meanest?)

Now we have financial scandals, part of Tony Blair's "legacy", with Gordon seemingly having no idea what to do abouth them. He can't even say if he backs Harriet Harman or wants to sack her because she accepted £5,000 from Abrams. He just stands there like a rabbit in the headlights, frozen and unable to move forwards, backwards or sideways.

And now it looks like there may be a housing market crash in the offing with houses potentially losing up to 40% of their value according to some commentators.

Gordon Brown seems to me to be a man with his finger off the pulse of the nation: he doesn't seem "connected" with the real world and real people and has to rely on advisors in order to make decisions. The best advice I can give you Gordon is: hire some new advisors. The ones you have at the moment are useless and are leading you up a blind alley.

Blair won three election. How awful it must be to be the New Labour leader that seems destined to lead his party out of power. Fancy being New Labour's equivalent to that loser John Major.

God do not tell me you want that squirt Blair back

Good heavens, no! I can't bear Tony Blair or his grasping wife. What I want is for Brown to do what's right rather than what he thinks might win him back a few points in the polls. He's got to stop all these "knee jerk" reactions to Tory spin. He's promised action on housing so let's see some council and housing association houses build. I want to see Brown honouring his promises, not prevaricating in the slimy way Blair used to do. I want to see ACTION from Brown not empty words and I want to see original policies not ones stolen from the Conservatives. It's still not too late, but it isn't looking good for the Labour Party.

The IS no worthwhile future under a Labour government. We are simply doomed, doomed, doomed ...

Is that you Private Fraser?

My pet subject is education. Having been Mrs Angry-with-everything-that-is-wrong-in-the-world and believing that I had all of the answers, but was powerless to do anything about it (hence the anger), I decided to write my theory. I took up my computer and wrote and wrote and wrote. Eighty thousand words later, I realised that I didn’t have the answers at all. However, all was not lost, because the cathartic venting brought me to the firm conclusion that our future was dependent on the quality and appropriateness of mainstream education. I’ve spent the years since, preparing for opportunities that will allow me to be part of the future of education. I now know that children are born with an innate passion to learn; I now know that different types learn in different ways; I now know that current mainstream education is geared to a particular type; I now know that we are failing all of the others; I now know that it's time our education systems evolved. My vision for future education is 1) One that impassions the child; for too many, education has become a chore they’d rather live without - education is a joy, we’re born learning and we continue to do so until we take our last breath. 2) A system that allows the child to learn at their pace; does it really matter that Sonny isn’t reading until he’s nine, ten or eleven? Of course it doesn’t – better nine than not at all! His university place (if that’s what he wants) will still be there for him whether he’s eighteen or twenty-five. 3) A system that is true education; not one that teaches kids how to pass tests, but real, in-depth knowledge that they will understand, that will become part of who they are. 4) A system that will engender true self-esteem and confidence in all of its stakeholders. I believe we have the resources to make the future of education a reality today. Any comments?

I do agree that learning should be at the child's pace and the person who is able to make such judgements to move a child on is a teacher. However, their hands are tied to meeting targets and testing children at 6 years old! Children are making themselves ill because they feel they are failing. Should it not be their progress abd achievemnets no matter how small that we celebrate and make known.
As for university places, at the age of 25 university can be very expensive to access, especially once you are in full time employment.

Hi Kim, you’ve hit the nail on the head – we’re reliant on our teachers to create the education system of the future. However, in order to enable them to do that, we have to give them freedom to bring to their profession their passion for teaching. And that means empowering them to do what they were born to do, not what section 5, subsection 25 of the education code tells them to do. Our education system was great during the time at which it was its best. However, we have evolved and in order for it to serve us into the future, so too must our education system. In the short-term this can be achieved at the teacher training stage and/or with coaching sessions for those teachers who have done the rounds and taken a few knocks (that way, their experience will add a greater depth of understanding to the sessions). Either way, we’ve got to become smart at bringing out the best in our teachers, in order for them to bring out the best in our children. Education of the future is empowerment, not instruction.

when i ask my freinds what they think about Britian at the momment they just go on about how bad crime, education, health care and poverty is. then they go about blaiming the government. why is it that we blaim them, when it comes to crime the government spends a lot of money and gives the best protection it can offer, i hate the people that complain about the NHS because unlike other countries we have one, i've always said to these people that if you dont like it save us some money and go private, and then it comes to education well im a 17 year old student and top be honest i've had the best education and i dont mean private schools i've spent all my life in comprehensives and got everything out of it. i think the next step in education should be to make scholls as pupil freindly as possible. in my schools teachers knew every students name and what they liked. in others i know teachers who dont know this basic information.
In my opinion the biggest issue is how teenagers are portrayed, people need to stoop blaiming teenagers for every peice of crime i've done a lot of good things for my community and seen a lot of good things done in communitys by other people, but i dont see these in newspapers.

Come back when your fifty and needing to use the NHS, like myself I've lost my legs through MRSA. then come back and tell us what you think.

My fellow members in Keighley tell me - and I agree - that reducing inequalities, global warming and under-achievement in education are each critical to all our futures. Full employment is wonderful and would help marginalised families. But we won't stop hideous inequality unless we find ways of positively motivating under-achievers at school and in the workplace. Strong public services is a meaningless objective. What we need are rising productivities from all public services from improving skills and new technologies. So that good outcomes for users increase faster than budgets. Causes of crime and AS behaviours are rooted in low aspirations and alienation caused by lack of opportunity and self-belief: we must be tough on those causes of crime.

David. Teenage kids are the new scape goat for all societies ill's. When i was a kid under the thatcher years single mothers we're the scape goat for all societies ill's. As for inequality i'm afraid that is a sad part of life and no rantings of social idealist will ever change that. However don't get me wrong always look after and stand up for others and never just except what you are told by the media, politicians, or it would appear scientists. These people who proclaim to have your best interests at heart are just people they live their lives in a self centered manor they will lie to get a round of applause and will not speak against the general consensus
(or the general view of the media, government, the public and their own piers) for fear of ridicule. I went to a run down school under the Thatcher years and yet most left with a good education not necessarily with qualifications but a good education all the same. This was not down to the state this was down to the teachers that as much as i hated them as a kid i now realise put their all in to what they we're doing. I've got one piece of advice which is when ever your told something don't take it as fact always look at the other side of the argument and form your own opinion.

Lets see how did that song go.


Always look on the brigh side of life. dah deedah

Sadly Britain as we know it has no future... After having recently returned home from my 8 year stay in Italy I am shocked and appalled by the state of this country. I have always gone out of my way to try and understand others and their views and will tolerate anyone who shows me the same respect, I learned to speak fluent Italian which I considered the correct way to go about intergrating into someone elses country remembering that I was after all a guest there.
This same courtesy I do not see being expressed in my home town of Birmingham, having realised that in certain areas my presence is simply not welcome. "Strange I'm sure I showered this morning", I ended up thinking to myself as I dared to purchase a lettuce in Sparkhill while various members of so called ethnic minorties wrinkled there noses at me. I have been leered at, followed, insulted (in arabic) called white **** ( may I add wearing nothing by any way revealing generally jumper and jeans and all without ever having exchanged a word with anybody) and made to feel so uncomfortable that I no longer go there. If I really have to, I make sure I only look at the floor. Initially I thought that I might as well go back to a country were I was made to feel welcome but then I was overcome by a feeling of defiance afterall both my grandfathers fought for this country as did their fathers before them. I will not be pushed around in my own home or be told what to think, having two Egyptian stepbrothers I will not be made to generalise about all Muslims either.. I propose that we as a nation start to use some common sense, our welfare system is a safety net and not a bottomless pit, our NHS is what it says on the tin and if we continue to allow people from lawless societies into Britain lets not be surprised when they break the law. If we have to stop and search 400 buddists to justify searching a muslim when fighting islamic terrorism then surely we are wasting valuable rescources. I also object to made to feel dirty for being a free woman born to a free country.
Sadly however I feel it is all a little late as we have been censored by pc laws and I can now sit back and watch while any response to this blog starts with the witch hunting word of the 21st centuary... RACIST.

I lived in America for about five years, specifically Phoenix, Arizon and Washington, and believe me living in the UK is like living in Paradise by comparison. The crime, injustice and cruely I witnessed on a daily basis that was, seemingly, invisible to native born Americans made me want to pull my hair out. Elderly women wandering the streets like tramps, pre-teen girls prostituting themselves openly on the streets, murder and rape almost daily occurences... uuuugh!... it makes me shiver even now. I couldn't wait to leave the shores of that awful, superficial, deluded country and return to sanity and civilisation of the UK and Europe. Believe you me this country is light years better to live in that any city in America.

Hi Victoria, and welcome back! I believe we are all on this planet to learn, and I believe that those who have travelled, have a lot of good to share. Travel is one of the best forms of education, as it takes us out of our comfort zone and enables us to learn a little more about ourselves - in effect, it helps us to realise our values.

The key point for me in your post was when you stated: "... and will tolerate anyone who shows me the same respect." The key to respect is that we feel as though it is something we need to be given by others. However, the only respect we need is that true respect we have for ourself. When we have complete respect for who we are and what we are doing in life, not only does it strengthen and make clear our sense of self, but also earns us the respect of others (not that we need it, but it's a good feeling all the same).

Respect, demanded is: shortlived, shallow and worthless; whereas true self-respect, enables us to be ourselves and live by our values.

Disrespect is borne of fear and we must first address our own before looking to help others with theirs. True self-respect, enables us to recognise the disrespect of others as being a reflection of their fears.

You are angry about the state of the country, because you care about this wonderful country of ours. There is a future for Britain, a great future for Britain, because of the millions of people who live here and do care.

Pat I agree with you.

I don't see a Britain as we know it for the future. This country has been ruined our customs etc are diminishing. I see a European country with a ethnic majority in about 20-30 years.

Hi Chaps, I've noticed on this forum that there seems to be an inordinate amount of post removals. Yes, even the 'karma yogi in training' has been hit by what appears to be over-zealous censorship. So, my thought is: has anyone thought of creating their own website in order to discuss constructive ways of putting the great back in Britain?

There is compass the Labour party left, then you have a newish site well one which is being done up called RED PEPPER.

You have many other sites and blogs all waiting for you.

sadly site are OK but you will always get people who will discuss Labour and then see messages removed.


Labour are not censoring this site, if you write something another person does not like they remove it.

Freedom of speech

Thank you Treborc. Perhaps what is called for is a message to those who feel compelled to remove other people's thoughts and messages: Next time you feel compelled to remove a post, ask yourself this question: what is the post telling you about yourself, that you are too afraid to admit, to yourself? Although you might rationalise that you are protecting others from what you believe is wrong, you are removing something that frightens you - nobody else, just you. When you remove a post, not only are you running away from your fears, but you're also removing the opportunity for others to get something from the post. My advice? Leave them all on. We all write for our own personal reasons, drawn from our own personal life experiences; and we all, every, wonderfully unique, one of us has something to offer.

"To speak his thoughts is every freeman's right, in peace and war, in council and in fight." Homer (The Illiad)

Not on this forum it's not. I think this lot run with the mind set of 'We have made up our minds. Please don't confuse us by telling us the truth'.

It seems to me that some few people we share this forum with seem to want to gag anyone from airing an opinion contrary to their own views. It's a case of "There's a right way of doing things (ours) and a wrong way (everbody elses)". Just because some of us have different ideas doesn't mean we are your enemies. I don't know why so many posts are needlessly removed from this site just because they are critical of aspects of government policy or the actions of some contemporary politicians. Let free speech reign! Let everbody have their say and be listened to! If you think they are wrong offer a counter argument to explain why. Don't keep deleting people's posts. I believe in climate warming other people don't but I would passionately defend the right of those who challenge my views to explain where and why they think I'm wrong: given a good enough argument and sufficient evidence I would change my mind and move over to the other lobby. Unless they are obscene all posts should stand and not be deleted. "Free speech, exercised both individually and through a free press, is a necessity in any country where people are themselves free." Theodore Roosevelt.

You have hit the nail on the head we are becoming less and less free. Every day are rights and liberties are being slowly removed. Not taken in mass no government would dare but just chiseled away at one little piece at a time then it hits you personaly and theres little you can do. The most cunning form of this is 'political correctness' to hold a view or exspress concerns about anything that steps out of the 'party line' will be ignored deleted or will receive cries of prejudice, racist etc.. The truth is people who delete these mesages just can't deal with the truth or realise they have no basis of their own opinion which was not well thought through in the first place it just gets them a round of aplause off their colleges. A great example went to a barbecue raising money for green peace
i asked a fair few people how they felt about patric more resigning from green peace as he felt the movement had been hijacked by political movements and politicians (algore) using
the whole environmental issue to promote their own political agenda. With out exception i got the response 'Patrick
moore the astronomer i didn't know he was a member' on replying 'No Patrick moore an american one of the co founders of green peace back in the 1970' i got the cold shoulder they could not handle
the fact they had no idea what they were talking about the only thing they understood was if they held a certain opinion they were part of a social group
and this is what is happening in politics and the media.

But the worst of it is you see this kind of exclusion with political leaders, i.e., they surround themselves with toadies and sychophants who will not challenge them when they begin to make bad decisions. This was the undoing both of Blair and Lady Thatcher: no one had the guts to put their hand on their shoulders and say, "May be this isn't such a good idea, Prime Minister." And then we get dire mistakes being made like the Poll Tax and the Iraqi War. Political correctness is another American import like "Trick-Or-Treat", baseball and their daft version of football, which, as far as I can see is synonymous with "censorship". The best illustration of this I can think of comes from a cartoon called "King of the Hill". The main character in this had an absolutely terrible neighbour who had immigrated to the USA from Laos. After an argument, which the neighour started, Frank goes into his house and says to his wife: "I can't stand that guy next door." To which his wife replied: "Don't say that outside the house or they'll think you're a racialist". Frank slumped down into a chair: "So I'm only allowed to dislike white people then!" he shouted to his wife. And it really is getting that daft. An increasing area of discourse is becoming more and more taboo. Race, religion and politics are the three main area where you have to walk over eggshell these days. While I have no wish to deliberately offend or upset anyone I do still want to be able to express my opinion as a free citizen in a nominally democratic country.

Britain has no future when Brown signs the EU constitution sorry treaty.

It's not over until it's over, Daniel! Sadly this kind of anti-democratic behaviour is becoming standard with all political parties. I live in Cornwall where the Liberal Democrat councillors have decided, in collusion with the current government, to abolish all of the district councils in favour of a single unitary authority which they expect to be dominated by... guess who... yes, the Liberal Democrats in perpetuity. Nobody asked the Cornish whether we wanted this or not. In point of fast polls carried out by the district councils, in the face of fierce opposition by Cornwall County Council, showed that 85% of their constituents DID NOT WANT OR SUPPORT the single unitary authority; despite this we're getting one anyway! And now we're seeing the same kind of behaviour, on a grander scale, in respect to Europe! Doesn't anyone believe in democracy any more? What on earth is happening to our nation? Are we living in a democracy? Or an oligarchy?

From my perspective, my idea for Britain of the future is one where all individuals take complete responsibility for their own, wonderfully unique life. We each have so much to offer, but much of what we have is currently hidden from view by our fears and diminished sense of self.

It's all well and good complaining about politicians not doing this and that, but at the end of the day, what does complaining achieve? Nothing, nada, a big fat zero. The politicians view the complaints, as being due to the ignorance of the masses, and the person complaining? Well, there is a certain amount of temporary relief from being given the opportunity to vent, but it is only temporary, because the issue remains. Complaints are a negative response to a negative action. The way forward? I think not. The way forward is to provide positive responses to negative actions.

You see, the only permanent way of ridding ourselves of frustration, is to work towards finding constructive solutions to the cause of the frustration; it's our problem, don't we owe it to our sense of self to help sort it out? What the way forward needs is: a change in mindset.

Now, our immediate response to that might be "But what can I do, I'm only one person in 60 million?" My answer is: we each have only one life to live and that is our own; we cannot expect anyone else to change theirs in order to make ours better. We have to make it better for ourselves and well, if we all do that...

The answer is a simple one: instead of complaining, think of the problem as a challenge, one that you really want to find a solution to. All we have to do is believe that we can do some good, that we can make it better; even if it is just a tiny bit better, it's a step in the right direction.

That change in mindset not only empowers the individual, but also brings a whole new, positive aspect to the world in which we live.

We are each responsible for the life we live; we know it's not going to last for ever, so let's make every day a good one... for all.

Nice sentiments. "I want to change the world... and I'm going to start with me." Well, it's always good for individuals to side with the Angels rather than their opposites but try telling that to some completely powerless individual on the minimum wage who cannot get a mortgage, or rent privately and has no chance of securing the tenancy of a socially provided home. On the other hand, if people acted in the manner stated this shouldn't be a problem because homeowners would take people in and offer them accommodation in THEIR own homes and people with second, third, forth... homes would give them away or at the very least rent them out affordably to the homeless! You're right, but in a Platonic sense: the world we live in is far from ideal. Big issues e.g., climate change, homelessness, criminality etc., have to be addressed collectively and internationally on a governmental level. Politics today (and economics too for that matter) are based on the notion that we are all totally selfish, self-interested individuals who always seek to maximise our benefit at at all costs irrespective of how our actions affect others or the world in general. The classic illustration of this idea is encapsulated in Baroness Thatcher's famous statement: "There is no such thing as society. There are men and women and there are families". You're right and are probably a very nice person but sadly your ideas will not be adopted by many in our fractured and imperfect society.

Hi Derek, your post gave me three options: 1) Do nothing, 2) React badly, due to the point of my post being ignored or 3) React in a respectful manner, by taking responsibility for my own hurt feelings and due to me wanting to take the discussion further. I feel that there is more to be said, so I opt for 3): Yes, I know that we live in an imperfect society. However, I know that we’re only going to make it worse by instilling yet more fear. When we abuse ‘those who have’ or try to guilt them into doing more for the good of the whole, nine times out of ten, they’ll raise their defences; fear instils selfishness. No good done, only more harm. However, if we can stop ranting at others and instead look to ourselves, we’ll see that what we’re trying to guilt others into, is a reflection of what we would like to do ourselves ‘if only we could’. We can! All we have to do is take responsibility for our own wants and stop expecting others to provide them for us. Yes, I know big issues have to be addressed on a collective basis. However, as I hope I’ve illustrated above, just because politics today is selfish, it doesn’t mean we’re going to fix it by complaining about it. We each have the responsibility to keep our government representatives in check and, in order to do that, we have to be better than them; we have to show them by providing constructive and responsible advice. We can’t force any other to change. However, we can change the way we react to their actions and words, thereby affecting a change to the outcome. Taking responsibility is not as you imply, passionless, in fact, it enables the individual to find within themselves their passion; their reason for being and more importantly, it empowers them to live their passion. How? We must first respect our self, only then will we respect others. Only when we take full responsibility for our own life, do we truly begin to live.

You sound like a karma yogi, Pat! Of course it IS much better to light a candle than curse the darkness as I conceeded at the end of my post. All power to you. The British are still a great, compassionate and generous people; what a pity we have no great, compassionate and generous politicians to lead us towards a brighter future.

Ah, but that's the rub: we do have great, compassionate and generous politicians. However, just as we have fears that halt us from being true to ourselves, so too do they. That's why we have to be better than them and offer respectful, constructive advice... it has to be worth a try. As you said, we are truly a great people - we are worth the effort. By the way, having looked it up on Wikipedia, I take being likened to a karma yogi as a major compliment - thank you - you've made my day!

It was SUPPOSED to be a compliment!

Let's get things into perspective. Personally I'm more afraid of the WHOLE WORLD dying from a runaway greenhouse effect than I am of being blown up by terrorists; I'm more fearful of the consequences resulting from America, China, India and the other great polluters than Iraq, Iran or North Korea waging war.

I can tell you some people who will not agree with you, those in the london bombings and those left scared for life or family members who lost somebody.

Derek don't subscribe to the great global warming con.It's all about taxation.All governments want to tax you, infact they want all your money.They look for ways to justify it but the great global warming con is the manna from heaven it's the tax governments have longed for.

But if that's true and climate warming is a lie that would mean that the vast majority of the world's scientists were either mistaken or in collusion with and in the pocket of the politicians. That seems impossible to me. The vast majority of scientists agree about the world's increasing carbon emissions and say that even the best-case scenario puts millions of lives at risk by the end of the twenty first century. The expected 3C rise in global temperatures is within 100 years will lead to a rise in sea levels and increase in desertification that will place 400 million people at the risk of hunger. Parts of Britain will be flooded as the UK comes under coastal attack. Developing countries will be the hardest hit, with ecosystems failing to adapt and between 20 million to 400 million tonnes of cereal production being lost. The temperature rise would be the consequence of carbon dioxide levels of 500 parts per million, roughly double those of the Industrial Revolution. The current carbon dioxide concentration stands at 380 parts per million, already the highest levels likely to have been experienced on Earth for 740,000 years. The polar caps are melting. New Orleans was devastated by a hurricane, which storms are becoming far more frequent in and around the pacific basin. Extreme events, like flooding, droughts and fires are happening with alarming frequency. The great barrier reef is dying because the ocean is warming. Glaciers are retreating... I could go on... and on... and on. As far as I can see the evidence for climate change is incontravertible. To deny it seems, to me, like denying the American moon landings or that the earth is flat: it flies in the face of every scrap of reputable evidence assembled by the cream of this planets science community.

I never said the climate wasn't changing, in fact it is but it's a natural cycle the earth goes through always has done since the earth was born. Why is it heating up well the sun is actually burning hotter now than it has ever done, that’s bound to heat up the globe and nothing can be done about that. Something that is always conveniently sidestepped is that as a result of the sun heating the earth a by-product of this is that carbon emissions go up.
In the past, there have been many times when the global mean temperatures were warmer... Global mean temperatures are cyclical with the seasons but also with other normal cycles, as they have been for the entire history of the Earth. Scientific data from ice cores, tree rings and other indicators of global mean temperatures prove this. Human activity has never been the cause of these global temperature swings as the “global warming” advocates claim. If human activity was the cause, where were the cars, the power plants and industries in our historical past? They did not exist.
Oceans are also a major source of greenhouse gases, as are trees. Trees and other vegetation take in carbon dioxide and give off other gases such as methane, a major greenhouse gas, and a host of other compounds, many of which are also greenhouse gases. Decaying vegetation also gives off methane gas. Studies of smog in the Los Angeles basin indicate that over 90% of the smog is generated by the vegetation in the area.
It is the fluctuations of the Earth’s orbit around the sun, volcanic eruptions, the emission of gases by oceans and trees, all natural occurrences, that cause rises and declines in global mean temperatures, i.e., “global warming” and “global cooling,” not human activity.

No government can stop any of this, but it can be used to convince people that they should pay more tax.

1) David have you got a deploma in environmentals? or you a scientist or ar you simply spouting something you heard on panaroma on the BBC? 2) You could be right or the scientists could be right, but what harm is it going to do to cut back on harmfull emitions? Is it so bad that we finally become more aware and conciderate of the environment?

Where did you get your statistics from David? Mine came from our own Royal Society and the IPCC. I remember similar things being said in defense of tobacco and asbestos, i.e., claiming that the cancers that we now KNOW that they cause we due to other factors. As per the past, it is well known that the Earth was much more geologically active: emissions then WERE due to volcanos. Over geologic time the Earth has cooled and vulcanism reduced to a relatively low level. As for trees, yes, they do emit methane but, due to defoliation and deforestation we now have fewer trees to emit methane than at any time in the last several million years, so their contribution should have gone down not up. When you analyse the data there really is only one conclusion: climate change is a reality. Sadly, I do not believe that human being are rational enough or possess enough self control to do anything about it. The pity of it to me is all the beautiful and rare animals that will go extinct before we become extinct ourselves.

Lets say it's natural, so your saying the millions and millions of cars are having no effect, that we had all those coal fired houses in the 1800 right through until the 1980 did not affect our world, all the steel making, all the coal fired power stations made no difference, all the billions of tree cut down is not affecting us.

Yes I agree taxation is not the answer because with Labour it's tax and spend culture has failed, but make no mistake the world is changing and in years to come it will change until we have lost it.

No Simon I don’t have a deploma or a diploma. I’m not a scientist. Call me cynical but I’m just not convinced of any of the arguments on global warming which ultimately mean government is going to tax me more and sort it out.
Many scientists outside the IPCC criticize what they described as the "arrogance" of the UN body, insisting that the evidence for global warming was still far from certain.
Professor Philip Stott, from the University of London, said recent research had damaged the credibility of the IPCC and its climate predictions.
"In the last month alone, serious scientific studies have undermined the whole basis of these predictions, with the temperature over the oceans seen as exaggerated by up to 40% and the very relationship between carbon dioxide and temperature questioned."
Professor David Unwin, an environmental scientist at Birkbeck College, London said the IPCC was guilty of glossing over many of the uncertainties in climate science.
These uncertainties are never really made explicit," he said. "The IPCC will give you error bars but there are huge uncertainties to do with the science that goes into the computer models that predict the future."
He said the models had progressively drawn back from the real doomsday scenarios of a few years ago as climate processes had become better understood and incorporated into calculations. "And in my view, and in the view of many other scientists, this refinement has a long way to go."
Check out Astrophysicist Nir Shariv he states, according to the IPCC's own findings, man's role is so uncertain that there is a strong possibility that we have been cooling, not warming, the Earth. Unfortunately, our tools are too crude to reveal what man's effect has been in the past, let alone predict how much warming or cooling we might cause in the future.
"Solar activity can explain a large part of the 20th-century global warming," he states, particularly because of the evidence that has been accumulating over the past decade of the strong relationship that cosmic- ray flux has on our atmosphere. So much evidence has by now been amassed, in fact, that "it is unlikely that [the solar climate link] does not exist."

Even doubling the amount of CO2 by 2100, for example, "will not dramatically increase the global temperature," Dr. Shaviv states. Put another way: "Even if we halved the CO2 output, and the CO2 increase by 2100 would be, say, a 50% increase relative to today instead of a doubled amount, the expected reduction in the rise of global temperature would be less than 0.5C. This is not significant."Does that answer your point Cornelius?


Nobody’s picked up on THE SUN’s contribution. What should we do put a big sunshade up?

You see at the end of the day something is happening but nobody has come up with a definitive cause.

I'll ask again, because I dont think you answered me! What is the harm in cleaning up the environment, cutting back harmfull emitions and invsting in new forms of fuel? It shouldnt take a global warming scare (whether it be tru or false) to make us want to clean up this world. So whats the harm in doing all this stuff anyway?

There is no harm.

Good to see the message of the con of man made global warming is getting out their.
The manor in which the UN, the EU, and our
own government have used this to steal our
money and promote their own political agenda is disgraceful.

Simon
If Cameron hugging some hoodies says it all to you, what exactly does the establishment in the last 10 years under labour, now lets see..early release from prison, toy coppers,losing hardened criminals/murderers ( our own plus the labour imports ), Police on the ground frustrated by the political correct top brass, security tied by human rights act, what does that say Simon ?

Mr. Cameron likes cycling so, after the next general election, he can put Norman Tebbit's advice into practice and "get on his bike and look for a job" because he is never, never going to be Prime Minister. If he stays on in politics, like most of his colleagues, he'll be looking for part-time non-executive directorships et al. So if he continues a pert-time political career he'd best learn to ride a unicycle!

Id say concidering I was 15 ten years ago, that I havent really paid much attention to what the labour party has or hasnt done in that amount of time what with most of that ten years involving the headache of growing up, school, peer pressure and relationships. Its only in the last few years ive took an interest and im sorry but YES... having some upper class ponse like David Cameron who has probably never known hardship or harrassment in his life, telling us to "hug a hoody" is the biggest farse I have ever heard from an MP. The man is a joke, but Tony Blaire and the Labour party are just as bad for their notion of ASBOs. Would you honestly rather have David Cameron in power then Gordon Brown? be serious!! Did you see video on the news showing David Cameron in American talking to teenagers in schools and the police about gangs? He couldnt have been more out of place walking around in a suit with his posh accent, talking to kids who had NO idea who he was. It was a pure gimmic and it just made him look moronic! I would love to see David Cameron taking over from Ross Kemp... "David Cameron on gangs on Sky One"! The man hasnt got a clue and hes just another typical upper class Oxbridge student who thinks he understands the hard side of life. I very seriously doubt the bloke has ever been on the recieving end of a chav in his life.

The sad truth is that NO one in this country seems to have a clue about tackling the real issues. We have one person telling us to hug the hoodies and care for them, while the other side wants to give out pieces of paper telling them off! This country is going to the dogs because parents cant slap their kids anymore, teachers cant shout at students and the police no longer lock anyone up. There is NO disciplin at all anymore. You do something wrong and you get away with it scot-free!

I'd say you have a short memory of the Thatcher and Major years.

Easy to knock Labour on everything, but ten years to put right the mess of those Thatcher years takes some doing, no schools, no hospitals, no jobs, lies spin and deceit, Major having curry and telling us to get back to the Victorian era of how to behave.

yes the good times.

I was no fan of Thatcher and never Major but at least Thatcher was straight most of the time with us, even if you did not agree with their policies. So we replaced sleaze with spin. Remember this, although the cons screwed up the economy they did put the fixes in place, just in time for labour to inheret a golden goose. Labour have since spent - taxed and spent again to the tune of the biggest govt borrowing in Europe ( the next generation will suffer because of this - hey but that's not Brown's problem now. Most of the spending has been wasted because there is no control and accountability. Yes we want to spread wealth for the general good but labour have taken (and wasted) so much more than they have created. Scotland only has about 160,000 net tax payers, give labour a few more years and you will be relying on London to support the whole country, most of which will be on tne dole or in public service - still at least labour will be guaranteed the majority of their votes.

In my opinion Thatcher was clinically insane!

However you cut it, the elderly and the poor as well as the moderately waged are ALWAYS better off under a Labour government of whatever complexion. If only the current administration would turn its attention to housing, especially social housing, you'd have to give them a lot of credit, e.g., increasing the old age pension, insulating the homes of the elderly and the poor, instituting a system of tax credits to help the modestly salaried, pouring billions into the health service (don't approve of the private finance intitiate however) and instituted a regulary increasing minimum wage et al. Would the Tories have ever done ANY of these things. Well, Thatcher and Major had eighteen years between them and did NONE of these things as far as I remember. Letting the conservatives back in would be a disaster for everyone but the wealthy.

Well. Although everything I said in the foregoing post was true, I find it kind of funny that a positive post like this, in respect to the Labour Party, doesn't get deleted whereas my previous more critical posts have been. I my opinion negative criticism should be listened to more than positive criticism since negative criticism tends to point out what is going wrong and what needs looking into. Whoever is deleting people's posts, be it an individual or collective, please let people's posts stand as they are, negative or positive, as long as they're not obscene.

You may steal our words! You may curb heartfelt expression! But you will never take our freedom! Arrrrrrrrrgh!

No they want take it just legislate it.

If we want to discuss the future of GB how about a subject
Do we want a EU Treaty Referendum.
if I don't see one soon I guess there is no point in visiting this SITE. oops I mispelt the last word

The issue with having a general election is do we want the lesser of two evils? Do you want David Cameron running this country with his complete lack of experience in anything, and his ideas about hugging huddies << that says it all for me. The only other candidate being an old man who probably should know how to run the country, but he'll listen to his advistors about "whats the modern way" to do things! We just cant win! There isnt anyone who could stand for power, who I respect.

You might be right, but one thing I do know the Tories are not the answer.

Only Smarties have the answer!

does anyone believe that the trade union movement has any input to offer in respect of the future of britain?i believe it most certainly does although by reading through this site they hardly get a mention.have labour supporters forgotten that the cornerstone of the labour party was laid by the trade unions ? i know what your thinking."same old argument from an obvious leftist trade unionist" but i think its a valid one.we dont seem to have had much help from labour in the past ten years but were promised an abolition of the many anti trade union laws that the thatcherite govt imposed on us.have we received any of that?no.

I was 36 years in the Labour party, and still belong to a Union, but hang on a minute Thatcher had to break the Unions of the 1970 and 1980's, or have you forgot the strikes.

British Leyland was a prime example, wrong coloured toilet paper strike, told you cannot watch TV while working strike, any reason strike it became a joke even I did not find funny anymore.

The miners strike was needed sadly Scargill through what ever reason perhaps small brain decided he was going to strike without a ballot, he was not going to follow the law not him, what happened the strike broke down the Union nearly finished all because that twit could not follow the rules.

In the end Unions had to be brought to heal for god sake I was working on a building site and we went on strike during the world cup to see a game of football.

Yes Labour has a duty to make Unions feel like they are part of the movement especially when our tax Levy is being used to fund Brown, I have asked that my Levy be used for charity and not Labour.

The fact is Labour See's it self as a lone standing New Party following the Thatherites scheme of things.

I do not see any Labour party anymore.

So another of my perfectly innocuous posts has been deleted. I don't think this censorship is attributable to the Labour Party but to some thin skinned fool without a life who has nothing better to do than try to curb free speech on an open forum like this. Can I suggest that the webmaster uses the new login to identify who is deleting posts and prevent that person(s) from censoring the thoughts and opinions of others. All posts from last Sunday onwards have been deleted by person or persons unknown. Pathetic.

David if you took the time (like I did) to contact the webmaster, you will find out the posts arent being deleted. People are clicking "report this message.." and its bein flaggged and removed and placed in a holding area. The problem is that NO one is checking them and putting them back onto the website. Their all just sitting in someones inbox waiting to be checked for abusive content.

I don't know what's going on tosh. It seems that any post vaguely critical of "New Labour" policies or personalities ends up consigned to the dustbin. This is bad. Tony Blair had a very unbecoming, spiteful and petulant side to his nature, e.g., consider the way he tried to nobble Ken Livingstone's bid to become London Mayor trying to deny the Londoner's a democratic choice as per candidate, or the disgraceful way he treated Mo Mowlem and couldn't be bothered to return from his Italian hoilday for one day to attend Robin Cook's funeral. Childish and unworthy or a real statesman. It looks as if this legacy persists in New Labour's disciples. It seems that some people think that a different point of view than their's qualifies you as an enemy rather than just another man or woman with what is probably another perfectly valid opinion. When Blair was re-elected in 2005 with a reduced majority he said: "The people have spoken... and we must listen". How can anybody listen to anything if the citizens of this nation are gagged as soon as they open theri mouths? Shame on whoever is deleting the posts of free men and women who are only attempting to voice an opinion. Ha! If anybody reads this I bet you won't be able to in the immediate future because as sure as eggs are eggs and Tony Blair was America's lickspittle this post will be gone before you can say Jack Robinson!

Trust
The people have shown their trust in the Government and large institutions by the way they have reacted to the Northern Rock troubles.
The Governments hidden taxes by criminalising basically good people and refusal to protect the people who had their pensions stolen has left most with a profound distrust of Government

Ps Brown’s love in with the evil Thatcher does not help our party

The way people have reacted to the Northern Rock "troubles" is ridiculous. The bank went to the BoE, did the right thing and said due to the US sub prime issue it could need extra backing. The BoE and the Government guaranteed this, but still people queue up trying to get their money out of what is a sound institution because it gets on TV a lot and people are easily scared. Financial markets would be fine if the public didn't get jitters, but I guess that's what makes them interesting.

Let me tell you if Brown was not heading for an election and had four years he would have done nothing at all.

If you look this guarantee is only short term and lets be honest if you saved up all your life and had a small nest egg would you have left your money in Northern Rock not bloody likely, and if it was so safe ass you say why then did it need a loan, no I be at the banks moving my money out, to late when the share holders and the directors and the tax man say the place is bust the saves get a small protection not a lot.

If people hadnt reacted the way that they did the bank would be a lot better off. Whilst the bank still has some money to play with it can find a way to pull itself out of trouble. Take all of the money away and northen rock is pulled under.

Yes and if it does go under with your money in it you lose all most all of it.

the fact is when a firm goes bust the last people to get any money are the workers, the bosses take their pensions out the tax man takes his bite then creditors then the workers wages.

If Northern Rock had gone bust the Bosses would make sure they were OK, then the tax man, then creditors would have demanded any money, and then you would have had about 20% of any money left over.

Some people might have a life times savings ordinary people are you saying you would have left your in the bank, not bloody likely.

I've voted Labour all my life and just want to say how apalled I was to see Gordon Brown welcoming Margaret Thatcher back to Downing Street. I understand why it was done (annoy David Cameron, etc), but given what Margaret Thatcher stood for I am ashamed that Labour should associate with her in any way. This was a big mistake.

I agree with Richard. Gordon Brown inviting Thatcher to No.10 may be for me, and many like me, the straw that breaks my back - the final slap in the face. Dislike of Thatcher and all her works was a main reason for becoming a Labour activist. How are Saachi & Saachi going to spin this? It's not working for me!

Well thank god somebody else thinks this is a disgrace. I said so already but it was removed, some Tory or New Labour must of complained.

Your 100% right takes some doing when Labour who complain about the Tories doing this and that, then say she was a great leader.

When she dies my house will have a party and by the look of her it will not be long.

Just shows what new Labour has become, Tory.

When Brown was a backbencher, Thatcher invited him to Downing Street to meet her. She may have been a Tory, but she was a masisve figure and stills has a great deal of respect in
Westminster. Brown meeting her a Downing Street shows he's statesman capable of leading this country. I don't think Thatcher would ever hold a conversation with Cameron.

Well the way i see it is for all my moaning about 'new labour' Gordon brown is a good man and listening to thatcher might do him and new labour a lot of good.

It's ironic but the main reason the conservatives are floundering is because David Cameron is too like Tony Blair! You've got to laugh ain't 'ya?!

Yes It is ironic they seem to have followed labours lead. If you can't win an election by standing by your principles and belief then just get an opportunist to lead your party who is electrat friendly who will tell the voter anything they want to here. This is not good for this country in any way shape or form.

UKIP otherwise known as BNP

Robert. How do you know this.

I like what I'm hearing from Gordon Brown about social housing. Give the guy a chance and judge him at the next general election.

I've heard Gordon Brown promise many things very few of which were delivered in part and mostly not at all. He's always announcing initiatives and schemes which just evaporate away and are forgotten. I'm willing to bet that by the time the next election comes around not one single council house will have been built anywhere.

I might go down the bookies and have few quid on that myself. I believe homes will be built but it will be more about keeping the flow of money going around the country. Example: The homes will need builders the builders get paid the builders pay tax and spend money in shops on items that our taxed they have to get to work on fuel that is taxed the shops that sale the items and the fuel that our taxed pay the workers that get taxed and in turn by more items that are taxed etc.. We'll all be alive and fed but no richer most of the money will be back in the chancelours pot. As for council housing i doubt they'll be many.
But the main thing is and what we must remember their not council houses their 'social homes'.

That maybe so but do you know companies who build large scale housing have a duty to build a number of social housing, sadly they do not because they use a law which restricts this building program. The fact is Brown has said this housing building program must be carried out by the private sector which will he Housing associations which means we are going to have serious problems getting the funding.

The ideal way would be to tell councils they have a duty, sadly council have told Labour to get lost.

SO we are back at square one who is going to pay for all this building, and it's going to be the council tax, so look out for another hike but not until after the elections, it's another does of spin

Is it not time that this labour goverment payed direct for training instead paying some other body to run courses (maths - engish)at £700 plus to get funding for a FLT lisence, when a course for a FLT lisence cost is (£300 plus). I am not saying that maths and engish courses are not needed but it should not used as a way to get funding for a FLT lisense it would be cheaper to pay direct for a FLT course ?
Just one of the ways this goverment wastes money,I am sure there are a lot of others.

Take a look at the financial statistics relating to the "New Deal".

You can read?

So they want to raise the drinking age to 21, and they havent got the intelligence to realise that wont make a difference. Little Joe Blog will just get this 21 year old friend to go in and buy the alcohol instead of getting his 18 year old friend to do it. The government really has NO idea about tackling issues in this country such as anti-social behaviour, underage sex, drugs and underage drinking. All they ever do is come up with quick answer solutions without actually tacking the issue head on. Increasing the age limit will make no difference! Did having an 18 limit stop 15 and 16 year old drinking? No!!! So how is a 21 limit going to stop 18 and 19 year olds drinking? Ughhh it wont!!! Its like this idea that if you sit a teacher down infront of a class of students and you ask him to talk about sex with them... do you really think the students are going to listen? They dont want some guy twice their age telling them about pregnancy and STDs and stuff they properly already know about. They want someone around their age who has had sex to come in and talk to them open and frankly about it. To say "yes sex is great and amazing but..." and be honest and not treat them like idiots. Just look at the sex education programmes in other countries like Norway. Compared to them, we are extremely timid. Its like the government thinking slapping ASBOs on a person is going to stop them commiting a crime, instead of actually locking them up!! That is where this country is going.... increasing age limits to stop underage drinking, using ASBOS to stop anti-social behaviour, criticising students when they get good grades at GCSE and A-Level and sex education that is beyond pathetic.

I don't believe we have any viable future outside of Europe so I couldn't vote for UKIP and, however much I dislike the mainstream political parties, I'd never, never, never vote for the neo-nazi racialist BNP which seems to be comprised out of the scum of the earth. Things may be bad but their not that bad!

I keep hearing this argument we have no viable future out side europe when you pose to any one who makes that statement the question why? They always get a bit lost for words or start to change the subject. We buy electrical goods from japan, we buy cloaths from asia, and oil from the middle east. If another country was to invade us and say we want to take the whole of your wealth and control your laws and command your army we would all defend our country with our live's as we have done in the past. But know we have a government that seems eager to just give the lot away so please would some one tell me why?

I did explain why I thought Europe was a good idea but the post was deleted.

I once thought joinig europe was a good idea the problem is we would not be joining europe we would be joining the eu. Their agenda is their own not a european one if what i say is not true then why would they not have just created the eu with out us. It would be worth you looking at the argument against it is quite sinister.

I'm going to have another go at voicing my opinion but suppose the anti-European fringe will delete the post as soon as I've click the submit button.

The real pro-Europe argument is an economic one. Europe represents the UK's biggest market, much more so than North America coupled with other countries. Britain exports more to Europe than anywhere else. If we weren't a part of the EEC they would slap a huge excise tax or tarrif on goods we were trying to export to them making us uncompetitive in comparison with other countries and we would lose market share as a result. Of course I'm talking about a "Common Market" here not a federated europe with a political overclass led by a president with a common defense policy and currency et al.

Nothing wrong with a common market, nothing wrong with making it easy to trade between us, nothing wrong with good relationship with our next door neighbours i'm up for all of that in every way. How ever i do drew the line at giving away the countries gold (which we would have to do to join the euro), the countries army which is still ours. What i also draw the line at is the countries determination of self rule this it appears is no longer ours. From what i understand 75% of law in this country is made by the EU. Our parliment just rubber stamps these legislations it would seem we can not reject them. If we keep the pound we keep our army then if the EU dose start to play up or dose start turn out to be a bit more of a tyrant than maybe it had proclaimed it's self to be then at least we are a force that would have to be reckoned with. I do not trust electable politicians at the best of times what would happen if we were ruled by unelected politicians.

I'm with you there. Like you I don't want to exchange the pound for the euro or have our armed forces influenced or controlled by Eurocrats: nor would I eastern european countries to force us to relax our border controls further. I've got nothing against immigration but our island already has 60,000,000+ citizens and a housing shortage so, logically, there has to be a limit some time. But I see no long term future for the UK as a separate entity outside of the EEC. We attract a lot of inward investment precisely because manufacturing in the UK allows companies to sell into the european market. Better to be in Europe fighting for the kind of Europe we want than outside in the cold looking in.

Derek it was nice to hear an argument not read off a government manifesto. Thought about what you said but the problem is that is not what the EU want they basicly want us to surrender our country and our hell bent on bullying us into it with the threat of leaving us out in the cold. And this government is not fighting our corner they are walking on egg shells the only way our country can fight it's corner is with the threat and the ability to say right if you carry on with treating us like this we will simply pull out this would be the threat that would make us a real player in the EU as if one country pulls out other countries would follow and they will not risk that.

Why exactly would the EU want us to "surrender our country"? This achieves nothing. The EU wants to work with us to achieve more prosperity for the whole of Europe. Each individual country wants a better share, and as a major player in the EU, we do quite well thank you very much.

I so hope you're wrong. I really, really do. But as time goes on my optimism is ever more challenged. At the moment there's still hope in my heart however.

Anyone remember Labour saying they would be tough on crime after that 10 year old Damilola was killed in 2000, laughable is it not..

I just cannot believe this Goverment we Pay to sort out our problems cannot work out how to stop the large majority of sensless violence crime.

Its so simple that the majority of this country know.

TOUGHER SENTENCING.. MORE PRISONS..
SCRAP THAT HUMAN RIGHTS ACT..

You commit a violent crime minumum sentence should be 5 years.
You carry a knife minimum 8 years.
You carry a gun minimum 15 years.
You Kill someone.. LIFE

That is a very simplistic approach and could be refined im sure !!

How many more dead kids will we have to find on our streets before things change.
How many more broken promises of being tough on crime.

Sorry Stephen i disagree lets look at america where zero tolerance, harder sentances are the norm where a young kid doing his first sentance will almost certainly be gang raped, or find a daddy or get involved with a gang who will look after him the end result of witch he'll have to either do their dirty work or be thrown to the wolves. What do you think will happen to those kids when their caught they will go to prison for life they will not be given an asbo. The
sad thing is weather they we're sentanced to life, hanging or dragged through the streets and stoned the fact is the concequences were not even on their mind the damage they've done is not in their mind. It's not all about punishment it's about what is going on with society that this is now part of british culture this is a massive problem no one line comment is going to answer the question. And no it is not simple.

Roland's right. America has draconian punishments, e.g., life imprisonment for petty criminals on the "three strikes and you're out" policy. They even have the death penalty and yet they have vastly more incidences of violent crime than the UK. People who are happy and have something to lose don't commit crime, people with no future and nothing to lose do. The "winner takes all" meritocracy that America stands for and that we are adopting is bound to create swathes of criminality by excluding armies of people from the prosperity and security many of us take for granted. Two million families are waiting for affordable social housing and homelessness has more than doubled over the last ten years. Treat people like dirt and you can bet that they'll act dirty.

Nice to have read that. That is what social ideology should be. Not sceeming ways to make society behave in a certain manner through political correctness and state control the end result of which is
a society of people being untrue to them selves because they act in manner they programed to act in. People should act in a manner of social ideals because it is a genuine beliefe with in them selves
that that is how a desent society works and it is every members of that societies duty to do their best to create that society for both them selves their familes and the whole country. I genuinly believe the first thing that must go in order to create that is 'the nanny state' and a resolve of individual
freedom. For example a school teacher should be able to deside how to deal with a class of children as they see fit due to their expeiriance of being a teacher not by following guide lines knoked out by a bunch of bureaucrats. A
policeman should be able to decide what to do in a situation based on his expieriance rather than having to meet a quoter for how many arrests he had that month. The fundermental beilef and working for a good society is this and you rarely her it said these day 'treat others as you would like to be treated' not treat other as it says in section 7 of the new european treaty paragraph 18-23 bla bla bla etc..etc... or will fine you.

Pat+Roland

That really is the kind of language we should be hearing from our elected politicians from all parties,what we have at present are politicians forgetting that the public elected them to run the country for the good of everyone not just themselves,politicians today live on spin or what i prefer to label lies,if government ministers stopped treating us all as idiots it would be a start,stopped lieing to us a prime example is the european treaty or constitution wich we dont as a country want,would it not be better rather then trying to lie to us over amended wording wich basically says exactly what was previously said and then trying to kid us that was not the case why dont they just be honust and upfront if the european union is so good then the people will vote for it if it is not then get rid,politicians i believe from all parties are putting their own personal wealth and power before the good of the country that is obvious and that is why so few of us trust the government or the oposition parties for once can these elected people not be honust and upfront over this one issue let the people decide and let both sides put their own case if the government lost at least they would have a lot more respect from the british people.

That is it all over. The worst thing is if a government will not lay it's cards on the table how are we the public supposed to operate our lives. They tell us they are going to do one thing so we adjust our lives with that in mind then they go and do some thing else. Why waste every ones time and money giving scotland it's own parliamant then give all it's power to brussels. I am now deeply suspicious of this government and it's true agenda if europe is such a great idea why will they not stand up for it why are they trying to sneak it in. If europe is such a great idea then why is brussels all ways trying to bully us into joining why do they not just say 'o.k. your loss' and carry on with out us with the beilefe that one day we will beg to join. One thing you do not ever seem to hear from any politicians being discused is how can we make democracy more effective and less corrupt. For example the main parties could have their polliticle campains funded through the state which would mean they would not have to scratch any ones back either business or union it would be indipendant. That is only one idea and not a suggestion. I'm sick of the lot of them just lies and spin all the way their just detached from reality, believe that their above us, that they know best and we do know how to think for our selves. The only time a government should go above the wishes of a country is in situations where for security reasons it can not disclose information to the public. The only other time is every now and again government do know best but it should stand by it's reasons, defend it's opinion, should have thought long and hard about why it has gone against public opinion and be prepared to lose an election as a result of standing by it's principles.

I believe the real agenda for the european union is quite sinister and proberbly quite unbelievable,i believe the multicultural experiment is to shift the population around in order to break up countries,i also believe that when the inevitable race riots start strict control over all of us will be imposed,we will be run by an unelected eu dictatorship working for low wages traveling by bicycle because cars and motoring will become unaffordable public transport will improve but will not be cheap and we will have all off our movements monitored in other words comunism.The politicians who have helped impliment these changes will be key workers and will recieve great wealth this whole european dictatorship is going on before our very eyes and the british people are to gullable to see whats happening.

Thank you for the initially positive feedback. However, the comments seem to have slipped into the 'fear and blame' mode. Please remember, we will never be able to take true control of our future until we take control of our individual present. And, in order to take control of our individual present, we must take responsibility for the position in which we find ourselves now.

Until we take responsibility with truth, we will not be able to provide positive solutions.

Please remember, when we tell someone that they are wrong, they will not change their ways (we don't, do we?). However, if we show them the right way, they will take our lead. Have courage, be true and learn to enjoy life's adventure.

Well now i am just disgusted thats another post i've had removed. Again it was inoffensive was not biost, was not racist it just exspresed an opinion and an opinion that each time i mention gets removed. Well thought police i have been very careful to express that opinion with out scare moungering so why do you keep removing the posts. I agree with Peter this is getting sinister.

Im shocked and appalled at the country.
We are so far away from the mission statement being shown at the top of this page its ridiculous. If it was'nt so serious it would be laughable. Unfortunately I dont have the power to do anything and those that do are more concerned with pulling the wool over our eyes and signing us away to Europe so they can choose what to do with us even more than they do now.

I despair at the country, every generation is getting worse. False stats/spin, dont make for a good country.
There seems so many obvious options to take to start to sort out this torrid time we are living through yet I never here any. I have to stop myself from thinking about it to much because it gets me down. I only wish I had the time and money to get involved deeper. A government should be about its people not the people about its goverment.

Kevin i empathize with you i just cannot for the life of me work out weather this lot just want to completely destroy this country or our in a complete day dream and genuinely believe that they are such superior beings that their opinion is the only one that matters and they should just completely ignore the public
as they do not know whats best for them (the nanny state). It's strange though i've been in the same day dream the rest of the countries been in over new labour
i've now snapped out of it and i think the rest of the country is snapping out of it. I once watched an interview with a german woman who was a round at the time of the nazi rise she said that the thing with hitlers regime was you did not realse what was happening till it affected you personaly and by that time it was to late. thankfully their is a bit of democracy left and we won't quite
be dragged off to alshfitz but i do hope the public and the media wake up to what is going on before they introduce legislation as to which hand we can wipe are buts with. i think they are starting to.

Ill tell you what the future will be.
Peodophiles in every street because they are getting smaller or no sentance at all.
Kids with guns or knifes or both on every street corner
Drunk or drugged to the eyeballs
More people on benefits than working
More Kids having Kids and expecting a flat as an automatic right.
Having to actively search for a fellow English speaker when out and about.
And more GOOD BEHAVIOUR CONTRACTS.
What an absolute joke when these issues and others addressed then we can once again be GREAT BRITAIN instead of Europes dumping ground for any one who wants free health care free housing benefits for life and do nothing for our economy except bleed it dry.
After this little rant i fully expect that it will not appear on this site but i feel compelled to air it after recent events in my country

Stats can be manipulated one way or another dependent what your trying to show.

Fact of the matter is everyone I know is feeling let down and deflated by this Government.

Governments should should here and act o what the people want not the people being forced to do what the Government feels.

Crime - CSO's, ok good idea. But not at the expense of the police. More police, traditional bobby beats. People need to be safe yet shootings and knife crimes are in the news everyday. Where's the Government on this? Stats shows crime is down!!!! Where? In rural villages? Because everywhere else is going to the dogs. Street crime/Happy slapping/Vilent crime. Less is probably getting reported hence stats show lower. Its a shocking state of affairs. Id be embarrassed to have this type of crime and social decadence going on my watch as Premier of the country. The prisons are full!! BUILD MORE!!

Immigration - I read an article in the last 12 months 590,000 in. 190,000 brits choosing to leave. Is it any wonder. Close the gates, only accept the trades we need after extreme scrutiny. Adopt the Australia style (i hear we maybe but for heavens sake, deport whats here and get the armed forces on the cliffs). If thats not

if you all lived in the real world you would see how bad things really are! but you dont you go on figures and statistics which even i could cunjur up you need to go down to the inner city areas for yourselves day or night and see what is really going with the effects of immigration. Imyself cannot stand going to my local town center, all you see is masses of immigrants from all over the globe its depressing
people constantly begging,trying to pick-pocket you or looking grocely at your young daughter like shes something theyve never seen before. This is the uk today british people need their country back and if your government wont do it, then its going to be the likes of the bnp who will as british people are feeling let down by your government. By the way my parents were immigrants from the early fifties but worked as soon as they arrived here never had help hence i myself and brothers were born and up to today we all work so does our siblings.

"NHS waiting lists are at their lowest ever" ???? Does anyone out there, deep down, actually accept this and agree?! I have relatives who have waited over a year for important operations. There is still no sign of his operation approaching. Long live this mess right?

Also, if labour would strive for full employment, here's an idea that'll help in your quest while saving money at the same time. Scrapping most benefits hence forcing those lazy ones at the bottom of society to "improve". If you want to eat, if you want free education for your spawn, if you demand free medical treatment, then you MUST put something into the pot or shut up. The labour party is against self assertion and pro-dependency. Am I right?

LAW AND ORDER/HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

I am so angry and incensed by the news today regarding the KILLER of the school teacher being allowed to stay in this country because "his human rights would be breached if he were deported" - my god, this country's legal system sickens me - judges and lawyers care about one thing MAKING MONEY! the whole legal system is a joke - it protects the guilty at the expense of the law abiding citizen and the criminals know this - so what future does this country have??? ...and the government should stop treating us like fools trying to flannel us that crime is down when it's clear that all violent crimes are rising -most of it fuelled by alcohol - i work in the NHS and i can safely speak for all my colleagues "we are sick and tired of drunks and selfish nasty people who are allowed to abuse the entire welfare system and then get legal aid to back them up and the CPS who decide 'it's not in the public interest' to prosecute! fat wealthy politicians, judges and lawyers who don't have to live in the real world like the rest of us - god they disgust me and sadden me.

hi alex i totally agree with everything you have said.The government live in these big ivory towers with big iron gates to keep them safely from the reality of the real world, where as us poor sods have to put up with all the injustice of it all. it makes me feel so angry and sad for us all and the future fo our children and grandchildren. when will we have a release from all of this injustice.

Education: I believe the current term times we adhere to in our Education system are obsolete.
Wouldn't we be better to have a school system with the children attending every weekday throughout the year & having an Annual Leave Allowance - taken with guidance from the Learning Group Teacher. Work could be taught appropriately & intermingled with blocks of Activity Type weeks. The 'usual' teachers could have time to plan the next set of work whilst Specialist Teachers take the children fo concentrated blocks e.g. sport / art etc to allow wider & deeper experiences for the children. Then Learning Group Teachers would be able to concentrate on the work they are teaching rather than planning the next term's work before they have finished teaching this term's work. Also this would enable flexibility in timing so that Schemes of Work are actually taught for the numbers of hours they had been devised for, rather than adapting them to fit the already set amount of time allowed by the length of a term. I know my own children have learnt to swim / drive much more effecively & proficiently through regular & frequent sessions e.g. one hour sessions every day for one week. Rather than going once per week for a term when it seemed they were almost learning from scratch each time. Julie Tasker BSC (Hons) PGCE

I've just heard that arch neo-Conservative John Hutton accusing the Tories of being "right wing". This is the Hutton that fitted lie detectors to telephones in the DSS, remember. This is the Hutton that wanted to give more power to Jobcentre Clerks to strip the unemployed of Jobseeker's Alowance for ever more flimsy reasons. Hutton you idiot! One day you try to play the right-of-centre tough guy, probably thinking that by doing so, by rubbing yourself up and down Gordon Brown's leg, you'll be able to keep your job for a little longer and then you feign a centre-left identity and accuse the Tories of reverting to Thatcherism. What a wally. Hutton, you're more right-wing than Edward Heath or Harold Macmillan ever were and they were Conservative Prime Ministers. Go soak your head you bozo. People like you bring the Labour Party into disrepute.

To answer the question - quite seriously, the last 10 years have made me desperate to LEAVE this country.

I would like someone to pass my comments ont the MP for Rossendale Janet Anderson please.
"If we are to make our country a greener place to live and cut down on fuel by using public transport as we are so strongly urged to, why do we have to pay so much for children to travel on public transport, I took my 4 grandchildren to a local park by bus it cost me £6 yet I travelled free on a pensioners bus pass, this in my mind will discurage parents with several children from stopping using a car and taking the bus, when I expressed my opinions to the inspector on the Metro bus in Todmorden he told me I was stupid, is this the way forward, I would like to know"
Pam

Pam, if Janet Anderson is your MP, you can contact her directly in a number of ways:

Write to: Janet Anderson MP

House of Commons

London

SW1A 0AA


Email: andersonj@parliament.uk

Why has this forum gone dead? I had to create a new account for myself to log on to comment. Is there anybody else having difficulties in logging on to this forum? You may have to create new accounts to answer this question. Can't the people who run this site look into it and correct it?

It's silly for Gordon Brown, the unelected Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, to pretend he has a "social conscience" or cares about "social justice". Gordon is an ardent free-marketeer who believes that "the market", i.e., something akin to fate, will provide a fair and just society. Look at the involvement of the private sector everywhere: health, education, housing... whatever. Millionaires donate money to City Academies and as a reward have a say in what they teach. Two million people are on ever lengthening lists for council housing as property prices and private rents continue to soar. Grow up Gordon! All you care about is an efficient economy (pardon me while I laugh up my sleeve) and don't give a stuff about the low paid, unemployed or the disadvantaged. Come out of the closet. Please don't delude yourself into believing that New Labour is any more just than Thatcher and Major were when their goverenments were like stinking meat, rotting on the bone. Be yourself. You need not be ashamed because you believe in shameful things.

As regards full employment For All & Tackling Anti-Social Behaviour/BULLYING & DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION IN THE WORK PLACE

What about an English Welsh & Scottish Railways Train Driver who was SACKED because of his DISABILITY / INJURY to his spine.. Who reported a Health & Safety Issue that VIOLENTLY LURCHING, JOLTING, ROUGH RIDING EWS class 67 locomotives were being worked with faulty suspension dampers leaking suspension oil & faulty suspension dampers that were removed & stored in the locomotives cabs, And still allowed to work trains at 100 miles per hour, While sitting on unstable seats that would rock from side to side
AT THE SAME TIME AS THE POTTERS BAR RAIL DISASTER
After suffering from 4 years of BULLYING & DISCRIMINATION by 4 EWS managers and a so called ASLEF local union rep, Who has been forced onto benefit's for the past 16 months, Instead of driving trains. Why has everyone in this GOVERNMENT just ignored him when he has written to them, Asking for them to help him ? WHY HAS HIS UNION ASLEF ABANDONED HIM ?
LIST OF M/P's MEPs & OTHERS WHO HAVE BEEN INFORMED OF 67 LOCOMOTIVES ROUGH RIDING.
1, I GIBSON. ( HELPED THEN RENEGED ON MY CASE ? WILL NOT TELL ME WHY ) 2, C CLARK. 3, D ALEXANDER 4, D TWIGG 5, A SIMPSON 6, P HAIN 7, H HARMAN 8, H BENN ( ELECTION WEB SITE ASSISTANT REPLIED WITH OFFER TO HELP ) 9, A JOHNSON ( ELECTION ASSISTANT REPLIED WITH OFFER TO HELP ) 10, J CRUDDAS 11, H BLEARS 12, J MCDONNELL 13, K LIVINGSTONE ( LONDON MAYOR BULLYING IN WORK PLACE / DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION / RAILWAY HEALTH & SAFETY, NOT IN HIS REMIT ) 14, J FITZPATRICK ( REPLIED WITH OFFER TO HELP FORWARDED REPORTS ON TO D.T.I / ALL-READY DONE D.T.I WOULD NOT GET INVOLVED ) 15, K VAZ 16, G DUNWOODY 17, D CAMERON 18, G GALLOWAY =================================================================== MEPs 1, R HOWITT 2, J TITFORD 3 C BEAZLEY 4 T WISE 5 R STURDY 6 A DUFF 7 G VAN ORDEN ================================================================== LORD BERKELEY CHAIRMAN R. F. GROUP LORD ASHLEY OF STOKE OFFICE OF RAIL REGULATION ( WOULD NOT GET INVOLVED ) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT ( WOULD NOT GET INVOLVED
PRIME MINISTERS TONY BLAIR / GORDON BROWN.
EWS TRAIN DRIVERS WORKING CONDITIONS & LOCOMOTIVE FAULT REPORTS
Locomotive 67008 Report A293647 26-9-02 AS BOOKED REPORT " " A 293644 " " A 293642 " " A 293637 " " A 293632 " " A 293629 " " A 293625 " " A 293624 " " A 293623 " " A 293622 STILL UP & DOWN SIDE TO SIDE ROUGH RIDING 15 TO 55 MPH 1L92 S...D RESTRICTED TO 55 MPH ( CONTROL INFORMED ) AT 55 MPH THIS HAS BEEN THE MOST UNPLEASANT THREE HOUR JOURNEY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MANAGER FROM MANAGER SENT 27 SEPTEMBER 2002 15:14 TO MANAGER SU...ECT REPORTS OF ROUGH RIDING 26/09/02 MANAGER PLEASE CAN YOU SEND ME A COPY OF THE DRIVER REPORT. THANKS WILLESDEN EURO TERMINAL 15A- ---------------------------------- 2335 ADVISED BY THE DRIVER OF 1L92 THAT 67008 (CAB 1) IS RIDING VERY ROUGHLY. EVAN AT 15 MPH THE DRIVER IS BEING SHAKEN ABOUT AND HE IS NOT PREPARED TO RUN ABOVE 55 MPH. RTZ ANGLIA, CPC, RES POWER CONTROL AND MAINTROL INFORMED.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
date of event 26.9.02 location en route time 23 35 weather fine lines involved none loco no 67008 train reporting No ------------ to ------------ description of event REPORTED TO CONTROL THAT 67008 IS RIDING ROUGHLY EVAN AT 15 MPH, DRIVER IS BEING SHAKEN ABOUT WILL RUN AT 55 MPH CONTROL INFORMED 2335. PLEASE SEE FAULTS BOOK. BOOKED NINE (9) TIMES. NAME GRADE driver DEPOT --------------------- REPORT DATE 27.9.02 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
67030 26-6-02 5C43 CONSTANT EXCESSIVE SIDE 2 SIDE MOVEMENT ABOVE 90 MPH VERY HARD TO STAY IN SEAT OK AT LOWER S...DS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
67030 13-6-02 1S81 AS BOOKED 3 DAYS A GO SUSPECT WHEEL SETS MAY NEED CHANGING RUNNING AT REDUCED S...D CONTROL INFORMED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
67030 10-6-02 1S81 LOCO LURCHING FROM SIDE TO SIDE VIOLENTLY ON PLAIN RAIL ABOVE 90 MPH MAINTROL INFORMED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
67003 31-7-02 1L92 REPORT A062623 CONSTANT BOUNCING AND SIDEWAYS SHAKING AT ALL S...DS ( AS PER A062612 FAULT REPORT SUSPENSION BOTTOMS OUT ON POOR TRACK -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
67013 7-8-02 REPORT A031355 1L92 THIS LOCO IS VERY ROUGH RIDING. SIDE TO SIDE AND UP AND DOWN. THIS IS A HEALTH AND SAFETY RISK AND COULD CAUSE A SERIOUS BACK INJURY ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67008 29/08/02 REPORT A293632 1L92 LOCO VERY ROUGH RIDING AS REPORTED SEVERAL TIMES PREVIOUSLY SIDE TO SIDE MOVEMENT IS TERRIBLE 80 MPH + 2 X KNEE CAPS REQD CHEERS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67008 10/9/02 REPORT A293637 1L90 AUX HEATER ONLY WORKS IN HIGH POSITION. LOCO RIDE QUALITY IS STILL THE SAME AS BOOKED 29/9/02 NOT SIGNED OFF KNEE CAPS STILL BRUISED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------67015 4.9.02 REPORT A 006060 1M62 AS BOOKED, CONSTANT EXCESSIVE UP & DOWN & SIDE TO SIDE ROUGH RIDING / DAs DOOR KEEP OPENING WHEN MOVING PLEASE REPAIR
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------67015 14/6/02 REPORT A 006055 1C02 LOCO ROUGH RIDING BOUNCING DDN, SIDE TO SIDE MOVEMENT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67027 10/10/02 REPORT A 294017 1L92 LOCO VERY ROUGH RIDING AT S...D EXCESSIVE SIDE PLAY ( BOGIE MOD REQUIRED ! )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67027 31/10/02 REPORT A 294023 1L92 LOCO IS VERY ROUGH RIDING IN EXCESS OF 70 MPH. SIDE TO SIDE MOVEMENT MOSTLY. KEPT BANGING KNEES ON DESK. TO EXAMINE ASAP PLEASE THANK YOU
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67030 6/11/02 REPORT A 233403 1L90 LOCO VERY ROUGH RIDING OVER 70 MPH TO CHECK OVER PLEASE THANK YOU
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67006 13/12/02 REPORT A 348302 1M29 BOTH CABS DRIVERS SEATS ARE UNSTABLE AND SHAKE FROM SIDE TO SIDE.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67018 16.12.02 5A25 DRIVERS SEAT No 2 CAB TO BE SECURED AT BASE SEAT TILTS TO THE RIGHT ( HEALTH & SAFETY ASPECT TO BE CONSIDERED HEAR ) ACTION TAKEN. SEAT ORDERED MTCE STAFF SIG
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67005 17/18/12/02 REPORT A 015947 1L92 LOCO FAILED AT N----------- DUE TO ROUGH RIDING. MAINTENANCE CONTROL INFORMED AT 0105 18/12/02. AUX HEATER FAILED No 2 END ON CHANGING ENDS AT N--------------- LOCO HAS SAME SYMPTOMS OF ROUGHNESS AT LOW S...DS THIS LOCO SHOULD NOT BE IN SERVICE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67002 06.02.03 REPORT A 087927 1C01 -/- 1C02 WATER LEAKING INTO CAB ABOVE SECOND MAN SIDE WIPER PANEL No 1 CAB. RIDE QUALITY OF LOCO NOT TO BRILLIANT FOR A MODDED LOCO ACTION TAKEN WHEELS SUSPENSIONS CHECKED OK -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67017 27.02.03 1M99 DEFECTS DRIVERS SEAT IS A HEALTH HAZARD AS IS THE EXCESSIVE NOISE AND VIBRATION ACTION TAKEN SEAT SECURED NYLON RUNNER LUBRICATED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67030 14/2/03 REPORT A 233417 DRIVER 1L92 AUX HEATER NOT WORKING ( C B OK ) LOCO ROUGH RIDING ( BOUNCING ABOUT ) ABOVE 80 MPH TO EXAMINE PLEASE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67002 17.02.03 REPORT A 087928 1M65 DEFECTS 1 WASHER BOTTLE NEEDS FILLING. 2 LOCO IS ROUGH RIDING. ACTION TAKEN SPRINGS / DAMPERS WHEELS CHECKED OK AWAIT FURTHER REPORTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Health & safety. doc Date: 05/08/2002 17:58:42 GMT Daylight Time From: NAME To: N------------- NAME Sent from the Internet (Details) 5 AUGUST 2002 Mr Name 1 N-------------- ASLEF Job Title Dear Name 1, I am writing to you to inform you of a health and safety issue, which I hope you can pursue, and address though yours, and ( Name 2s ) good office. On Wednesday 31/7/02, after, I had completed my turn of duty on diagram (7), I had to book of sick with stabbing pains in my lower back and left hip, unfortunately this was owing to the constant buffeting, and rough riding, I experienced on 67015 & 67003, the two locomotives that were used on 1- - - & 1- - - postal services from and to N--------------. I now feel there is an ongoing problem of rough riding, with the class 67 fleet on the Norwich route, that seems to be getting worse, and which, have now affected me personally. The two locomotives I worked on Wednesday had both previously been reported in the repair books for rough riding. I hope my letter can assist you in highlighting this problem of rough riding, as i am now concerned that the only traction at N-----------, which is used on a daily, week in week out basis for the postal services is the class 67 fleet. Yours Sincerely, NAME ( HAND WRITTEN REPLY ON BOTTOM OF LETTER ) 16- Aug - 2002 Name, THE ABOVE WAS DISCUSSED AT ARKWRIGHT ROAD, 13th AUGUST 2002. AWAITING MORE REPORTS NATIONWIDE TO GIVE MORE POWER TO OUR ARGUMENT.

Yours Fraternally SIGNED NAME 2

HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO WORK WITH EQUIPMENT LIKE THIS AND THEN BE SACKED ?

THE 4 YEAR BULLYING & DISCRIMINATIONBY 4 EWS MANAGERS & SO CALLED ASLEF LOCAL REP OF ATRAIN DRIVERWITH A DISABILITY / LONG TERMHEALTH CONDITION / INJURY
(1) Train Driver crossed out & shurker His spelling not mine written on your mailjustbecause you have an injury / disability / long term health condition. (2) Then are told you have a FXXKing attitude, then told toFXXK offyou FXXKing cripple as he drives off when you go out to relieve someone on a locomotive. (3) When you turn up for workandthe gate lock & chain are pulled so hard and locked on the inside of the gate that you cannot pull the chain around the gate toopenthe gate and get into your depot. (4) When you have a small misdemeanour of leaving the tail lights on a loco and have it highlighted and underlined on the depot notice board for all to see. then when you try to stand up for yourself after 4 years of bullying you are called a FXXKing gutless txxt 4 times when he comes out to relieve you after he has popped out from his hiding place from behind some large bushes near your train, instead of standing at the departure signal, which nearly leads to a fight, and when you get back to your depot it is written on the notice board txxt no txxts are useful your not. (5) On top of all this you have 4 managers bullying you because of your injury and disability accusing you of. (1) Picking your jobs and costing your company thousands of pounds. (2) 2 managers constantly refusing you to return to work when your G/P and there own O/H G/P say you can return to work. (3) One manager telling you that there is no money in his budget for a driver like you. (4) The other manager telling you to go home and book off sick. (5) Then they unlawfully cut your wages to half pay. (6) Ring you up at home at 1615 on Christmas Eve just to tell you your not going to be allowed to come back to work. (7) Then the 4 th manager tells you to stop playing games. Accuse you of fraud. Tells you hes going to have you for gross misconduct. then tells you he will send a manager down to the depot to sort you out just because you tried to come back to work. (8) Then when you do get back to work for 11 months you are just called in the office by your manager and told that your company's solicitors wanted information with regards your court case which had been dropped then on his suspension letter it is a completely different reason why you were suspended, 3 days after you nearly have a spad (Signal passed at danger )at a major junction with a 66 that the brake control unit had failed on your loco that was blowing the brakes off as you were putting the brakes on. With no information as to what the meeting is for then suspended then sacked for your disability, with the managers and H/R managers picking & going though your private medical records that have been given to there solicitors under legal privilege for a court case, which did not go to court and was dropped. Is this how Equality is in this democratic society of today ? It is not my intention but if any one is offended by the language in my letter then i apologise. And for the record my wife and i lost 8 of our family members in 10 years, up to the 18 months before my sacking, with my mother 3 years & my brother just 18 months before i was sacked. As well as having the added responsibility of our handicapped adult son. No wonder i have had two mental breakdowns. And the company well would you believe it says on its web site. That it has the corporate responsibilities for the care and for the welfare of its staff.

The locomotive reports are of 3 & up to 4 hour journeys, 8 hours if you had the same locomotive or another rough riding locomotive back to your home destination. 8 hours of constant high s.p.e.e.d lurching, Jolting, Rough Riding.

Have you tried obtaining legal aid to pay for a solicitor to sue the employers privately? Or, what about one of those "no win, no fee" practices? Failing that why not dangle the devils from the yardarm?

Yes.
After unions General Secretary refused a union funded solicitor. Cost £700 hundred pounds just to get to application stage of a Tribunal.

Advised by no win no fee solicitor to withdraw from Industrial Tribunal after Company's solicitors stated that if Tribunal proceeded they would counter prosecute for £9,000 thousand pounds of wages + costs that they said was owed to them from the date of dismissal.

By an agreement they have with ASLEF.

On the darkest days since Bullying & Sacking felt like he would be the one to be dangling from the yard arm.

What about the European Court of Human Rights?

This is a part copy of a letter from a solicitor,

Firstly, can I clarify that I cannot see that there is any cause of action against your employers under the Human Rights Act 1998, the Human Rights Act does not unfortunately apply between Employer and Employees.

How about that, Make you think dont it ?

E-MAIL FROM AN MEP

Thank you for your further email.

I am sorry to hear that you continue to experience problems and can only suggest that you consult alternative legal counsel if you feel your solicitor has acted unfairly. As I am unable to intervene in legal matters, or give legal advice and as this is not a European issue, I am unable to assist you.

Yours sincerely
NAME OF MEP

Then all I can suggest is that you seek devine imprecation from the Lord, or hire a hitman to do the dirty on the drongos that persecuted the victim of this injustice.

We would just be satisfied for an M/P or someone in power to at least make a stand against BULLYING & DISCRIMINATION in the work place, And just look at the facts.

If this is how a major freight train operator is allowed BULLY & lie to get around the disability discrimination laws in the 21st century in this country then where do we go from hear ???

The Labour - sorry "New" Labour Party - has lost its way, abandoning the poor and the disadvantaged. Many people in my area are saying that the party starving for meaning, purpose and policy devoured its own heart long ago and that now an empty neo-conservative husk has replaced it, standing for nothing and beliving in less. The defunct "New Labour" MP that formerly represented my constituency always used to say that if we voted for her we would have a "voice" in the government: but what good is a "voice" when all it said was "How high?" whenever Tony Blair said "Jump!"? Dozens of former Labour supporters in my hometown are saying that the best thing for the Labour Party would be a period out of office. The forces of light and darkness would then battle for the soul of the party, and, were the forces of light to win, the party might once again stand for something other than winning elections.

I used to have a certain respect for the old style of labour party,even though it had the image of being the party of the cloth cap brigade and seemed to have very little control over union activities at least it was an honust party that you knew where they stood,you either agreed or disagreed.Today new labour is not regarded by middle england as the kind benelovant party it portrays it is regarded as an unpatriotic tax burdoning,undemocratic dictatorship.It survives on lies and spin and avoids constantly the real issues that concern the public like europe and the true motives behind it,imigration wich concerns most of us,undisiplined yobbish behaviour,because of total breakdown of proper discipline in the home and schools,a totally disillusioned police force who contrary to what you read on here do not support this government or even respect it and the total erosion of freedom of speech and civil liberties because of stupid politically correct crack pots,labour ministers bragging about smoking pot,what a fine example to show young people and a costly corruption investigation wich no surprising no one was charged for,this is a wasteful dishonust and disgracful government who hide from the real truth and only represent a minority mainly single parents,imigrants and very few others.

Can you please get a dedicated discussion topic about Anti-Social Behaviour? Its very looses covered in this one, but I think its an extremely important issue at this time and something which needs tackelled. Create a dedicated thread specifically about Crime and Anti-socialness!!!

Do you think any one from labour reads this. Well that is other than the spin doctors. I have my serious reservations.

Dangle the yobbos from the end of a rope!

Well someone is creating the header topics. Whether it be someone high-up or one of the IT administration staff, im sure they could add a new topic if asked.

Well, forums like this are a bit like praying. You don't really think anyone is listening and you don't really think anything is going to happen, but you kind of feel better for making the effort anyway!

Good point and well made i'll just have to imagine mr brown is sitting their right now eating some pork pie's reading with great interest these post's and getting a real feel for the issue's that surround people that live in the real world i'm sure he dose care but just feels it would be better to act intirly against their belief's or interest's.

How can anyone with even a glimmering of social conscience be willing to spend billions on a worthless identity card scheme and nothing on providing social and council housing? Gordon Brown seems to think that if he gets someone a part-time or minimum wage job everythings sorted! That person now can be self-sufficient and find his/her own accommodation and pay their way on £180.00 or less per week! Garbage. Gordon loved the sound bite, "Rights and responsibilites" but didn't live up to it as far as the poor were concerned: they lost their right to an affordably rented home and he had no responsibility to exert himself to help them. Yet he doesn't seem to mind giving middle class people on fabulous salaries millions of pounds of tax-payers money to enable them to buy a house. You couldn't make it up. The poor, who have no hope of ever mortgaging a house, pay taxes some of which are then used to subsidise middle class people, not to rent, but to actually to purchase a house of their own! If that's your conception of "fairness for all" Gordon, you can stick it where the sun don't shine.

I personnally dont think the ID cards are worthless. We live in a binge drink society where young kids can buy alcohol from shops underage, go to their local pubsunderage or go clubbing underage. I know plenty of girls who are under 17 who go clubbing. A national ID card (provided it was either free or cheap) would be ideal. The only other form of ID a person can possess is either a passport which is clunky to carry around or a driving license. Both of which cost around £40-£60 I believe. Thats alot of money and I know people who cant afford that! We also have an increasing issue with illegal immigrants and having 1000s of them loose around the country and not know who or where they are. We have kids bunking off school, and people going missing everyday, we have anti-social behaviour rampent in the streets. There are countless ideal situations where a national ID card would come in usefull with being able to instantly ID a person or know whether their are legit. Is it really that hard to remember to carry it? put it in your wallet or purse and its always there. There are times when we need to be observed and monitored and with the state this country is in, this is when.

But are they worth £8,000,000,000? A figure often quoted as per implementing the scheme. The year on year cost would increase as time went on.

Oh dont get me wrong! I appreciate they will cost a stupid amount of money. But technology these days is that cheap, I'm sure these ID cards can be done at a fraction of that cost! If so, then I still think they are ideal.... provided they cost less then buying a passport or driving license for those with little money.

Well simon whats a "stupid amount of money" to a stupid government.

Sorry, I got this wrong. I missed out a one and should have written £18,000,000,000! That's crazy, man! Beyond crazy.(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4590817.stm)

To be quite honest, I can see this whole ID thing being a monumental fiasco with c*o*c*k ups galore right from the very outset. I find most government bureaucracy highly inefficient in this country and, judging from how many never paid the poll tax and were never caught up with, I should think that a similar situation will occur with ID cards.

Yep. And don't forget this whole project depends on a monumental amount of perfectly functioning information technology - which always runs massively over budget and is always plagued by massive faults and delays. This is Blair's legacy. Big grandstanding hih-tech projects that cost a mint and fail to live up to what they are supposed to. I can only hope Gordon Brown will scrap this sorry scheme or cut it down to size. It really isn't worth squandering billions on.

I am 40 yrs old and have never seen this country so dispondant, people dont want there kids taught in browns ways dont try to kid us what a child needs our partners are europe these are the languages they sould learn why do we have to change our ways these ways appealed for the people to come here so try keeping in tradition. i have never felt taxed a much as i do already. if ever you build anything for yourself the goverment want it before you die. i can see why the english want to leave

I know you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover. But does anyone else find it really hard to take GB seriously when it’s on the television doing an interview? I know it’s a daft statement to make, but he doesn’t have that PM look to him. I see him on the television and my first reaction is “this bloke is the PM?”. He doesn’t have the charisma that I expect from a public figure. It churns my stomach to say so but even David *HugAHoody* Cameron has more appeal and I hate that guy for being a mamma’s boy. I expect GB is really intelligent and witty and knows what he’s doing, but something doesn’t seem right. I had never actually seen the bloke on TV until he took over. Its like he has been let out the cuboard and has seen the light for the first time in 10 years.

Mussolinni and Hitler had a lot of charisma, so they say!

Stalin was said to have told a really good "knock knock" joke I hear!

Well he has just been let out of the cupboard (the cupboard being number 11). I think the original plan was use blair to win the election then let brown take over how ever blairs plan was to let labour use himself to win the election then not step down. How ever after Iraq and the rest of the bungle's and as it's looking less an less likly labour will win the next election blair did the only sensible thing which was to get out and let some one else lose the election that way he got to jump before he's pushed.

I think most people feel the same about Gordon. "Something's not right." You just can't imagine him meeting and greeting other world leaders or foreign dignitaries can you? To Mr. Brown seems like a dark souled, aloof, remote, political monomaniac who lives in an ivory tower and has become semi-detached from the every day concerns of ordinary men and women. He's a man who has spent his life devouring theoretical texts about economics and politics who has waited all his life to have a country to play with and try out his own pet theories on. And now he's got one. Private companies now make money out of the sick: your great, great grandchildren will still be paying for the services we now enjoy thirty years from now. The unemployed are forced into workfare projects. "I'm going to shut down the something for nothing society," said Gordon and he did... unless you were an employer in which case you could recruit as much free labour as you wanted from the ranks of the unemployed. (In fact the government would actually PAY you to utilise the unemployed in an involuntary fashion to help "grow" your business!) Homelessness and house prices have reached record levels with the amount of social house building simultaneously breaking all previous records... but in a bad way... no previous government has built less social housing since records began! Even Margaret Thatcher build more house than Gordo, the self-proclaimed "man with a moral compass"! (I think you mush have a magnet in your pocket Gordon, because your "moral compass" isn't pointing towards "fairness for all" and "social justice"!) The gap between the rich and poor has never been wider and we owe more money collectively than ever before with interest rates and inflation rising.

All of Gordon's ideas have been filtched from other countries, e.g., tax credits from the USA and workfare from Australia and America. I doubt if he's ever had an original idea of his own.

I voted for the Labour party all my life until 2005 when I voted Liberal in the hope of getting rid of my New Labour MP and keeping the Conservatives out. It worked. I've now got a Liberal Democrat as my MP who is more left wing and socially aware than her predecessor ever was. I don't know sport. I loathe the Conservatives and despise the New Labour party. They seem one as bad as the other and just as phony. Neither care in the least for the poor and the helpless.

You know. There is a 'something for nothing' mentality that exists in this country. I have seen it for myself and, quite frankly, their numbers increase as they sem to be the ones who have larger families. I am not talking about those who through no fault of their own cannot find a job or who are genuinely unable to work, but those people who have baby after baby without any concern about the responsibilites that having a child demands of us all and whose children will, in mnay cases, quite likely follow the same pattern. These people do not live in poverty; their houses are paid for them, they go in taxis to do their shopping, their kids have play stations, they bring back crates of beer and party several times a week without regard for their neighbours. I have seen it all with my own eyes and Mr Brown has correctly identified this phenomenum in British society. I can quite assure you that, in mnay other countries, these people would get short thrift, and quite rightly so.

I'm sure this is the argument Gordon Brown would use to justify his actions: galvanising the moribund "jobseekers" into action via workfare programmes. Well, I've got no problem with asking the jobless to do work for the community provided while they're doing it they get paid the going rate for that job and never less than the minimum wage. I lived in America for a while, not a place renowned for a cushy welfare system, and, yes, in many states the jobless were expected to participate in workfare but received the minimum wage while doing so... until George Walker Bush came on the scene. Arguing that workfare payments were not real "wages" he pursuaded his government to abolish minimum wages for workfare programs; participants in the USA now get subsistance rates while doing 30 hours a week, usually of hard manual labour. Of course, in this country the jobless NEVER received the minumum wage while co-opted onto similar programmes. Gordon always stuck it to the unemployed. Do I think some of the jobless play the system for all that it's worth? Yes. Of course there are bad examples as there are amongst all groups of people, e.g., politicians selling honours for cash etc., but to tar all people in a group with the same brush is foolish in my view. Similar thing with housing. Nobody on a low wage can afford housing association or council rents, let alone private rents, without a top up from the government. But is this because they are personally to blame or are the rents themselves too high? Before the conservatives abolished them rent officers had the power to set a fair rent for a property based on its amenities and facilities; this kept rents down to affordable levels. Now people pay "market" rents and landlords can charge whatever they can get for their property; poor people are hence always outbid by richer people. I am really dispirited when the Victorian notion of the "undeserving poor" begins to rear its ugly head in the twenty first century, i.e., the poor deserve what they get because they're too lazy, too stupid, too poorly qualified, too inflexible, too this or too that to better themselves and get on in life like the rest of us. This is the old Tory tactic so often used to justify ignoble welfare cuts and initiatives to pilory single parents et al. This arch rhetoric may appeal to unthing Thatcherites but will not wash with me. Sorry Mr. Emil. I agree with a lot of what you say but can't agree with this.

I would most certainly be against paying those on workfare below the minimum wage as it would be plainly unfair both to the unemployed themselves as well as those who are not unemployed since it would be unfair competition and undercutting their wages also. I have never really thought much about workfare and can see that, if badly applied, it could turn out to be very draconian and coercive in nature and could also undermine the dignity of those who are genuine job seekers and are unemployed through no fault of their own. However, there is such a thing as the ‘undeserving’ poor, like it or not. They are a minority of the unemployed, but they make their presence known through their anti social behaviour, total lack of consideration for others and feeling that the rest of the world owes them something. In the past, I have wiped eggs from my door due to these people, I have endured constant foul and obscene language from these people, my wife has endured xenophobic insults and threats for asking them not to throw litter on to our property and it is only because people got together and complained forcibly that all this has quietened down. These people are a minority and have nothing to do with the majority of the unemployed who are decent people. But they do live as parasites on the efforts of others, they do breed without regard to responsibility, they do trash the locality and they do have an utter lack of respect for others. If you lived next to some for a few years, you would see what I mean and find yourself cursing them also with terms such as ‘f*****g chavs why doesn’t someone cut their b****y dole money!’ and so forth as you see the litter and garbage strewn by them once again across the space where your kids play just in front of your door.

Every person in this country deserves to live in dignity unmolested by the attentions of ruffians. I would be the first one to condemn uncivil and antisocial behaviour, particularly towards women, under any circumstances and wish more action could be taken against the thugs that behave like this. Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to defend the indefensible. The fact is that I worked for a charity for about four years and met dozens of unemployed men and women, only different from me in that they were unluckier than me, having worked in the main in manufacturing which was withering on the vine. Overwhelmingly the people I met were intelligent, proud and decent people who just wanted a job and a home and to get on with their lives causing as little harm to others as possible. Many were attempting to better themselves via educational and other training in the hope of returning to work. A large number of these people, some with babies or pre-school children, were going through hell as far as accommodation was concerned, often forced to move from one atrocious temporary let to another every couple of months. It used to break my heart to see it. Thank god that Gordon Brown is after twenty eight years (eighteen under the Conservatives and ten under the Neo-conservatives led by Tony Blair) pledging to expand the social housing stock. But I digress. The point I'm trying to make is that, yes, there are bad apples amonst the unemployed, but they represent a very, very small percentage and mostly consist of out-of-control young people who should be dealt with managed by the authorities. A government with any kind of a social conscience should strive to see that its citizens have access to affordable accommodation. People who work should be paid for their labour whether privately employed, self-employed, employed in the public sector or enrolled in a workfare program. People who abuse the system or their fellow citizens should be dealt with as individuals not as representatives of particular groups. That's what I honestly believe in. Rights and responsibilities but also fairness and equity for all who deserve it.

I disagree...IMO Gordon Brown is very statesman-like...in the way of days gone by, when a politician wasn't a wannabe celeb.
Give him a chance to shine and lets reserve judgement...I am very encouraged that he is 'reflecting' on using Supercasinos to regenerate poor areas...whoever thought gambling was the answer (apart from the conglomorates who will make money from running them) needs to take a long hard look as to why they supported this in the 1st place.

Brown is more right wing than Harold Macmillan or Edward Heath! Shine?! You can't polish a cowpat!

Super casino's to regenerate poor area,s are you having a laugh. Only the blind can not see the only reason gordon want's supper casino's is to generate revenue. He would have put more speed camera's up but theirs no more room. To be fair it will generate revenue and as a knok on effect probally will put some regeneration to the area but let's not forget people gamble their intyre live's away in those place's not to mention their own families. Gambling is a bad thing as far as i'm concerned but it is a matter of choice it should hardly be encouraged. If you think the idea is to help a deprived area then you really need to wake up it about milking more money.

To be honest, I couldn't care less even if he looked like spud from Bob the Builder. What counts is what he believes in and what he is prepared to do, not whether he can walk the walk and talk the talk. At least, he doesn't have that annoyingly inane grin superglued to his face like his prdecessor did.

So I'm not the only one who found Blair's smirk annoying! I'd like to think Gordon Brown would commit himself to do something more about poverty, but I believe he is too free-market orientated to interfere much with any market. For example, I bet you that when the next general election comes around homelessness with not have fallen, probably increasing, under his watch. Unless he changes the way homeless people are counted in order to reduce that disgraceful figure! I was told yesterday that according to New Labour a "full time job" is a position that lasts for at least thirteen weeks where the person doing it works at least sixteen hours a week for each of those thirteen weeks! Is that right? Doesn't sound much like what I'd call a full-time job.

But why didn't Brown stand up sooner and protest his disapproval in respect to casinos earlier? A vast amount of money and time has now been wasted pursuing a project Gordo obviously always despised. Why didn't he raise his voice and protest earlier? Why did he sit passively by and let Blair have his way only reacting when he emerged from under Blair's shadow? Hardly the behaviour of a man of courage and principle in my book.

I'll give him credit on the casino thing, because I never understood why we needed them anyway. I wouldnt want a super casino in my town or city.

Yup I completely agree (sorry this was my homework but I got a bit involved). I prefer GB to Tony Blair but I still dont like any of the parties, especially not the pampered dave the chameleon.

Ah god... David Cameron does my head in! Has the man ever actually experience what real life is like? He talks about giving hoodies understanding and care!! Try telling that to the countless number of people who have been attacked, mugged, raped abused or harrassed by a chav in a hoody (including myself)! I would love to through him into Newcastle on a saturday afternoon, and watch how handles all the chavs who try to start fights with the goths in Old Eldon Square. "Hey you two give each other a hug and make up!!!!" I cant stand these MPs who have grown up in the lap-of-luxary and then try and dictate how bad life is and how we should fix it.

This is Britains future unless you people wake up, its no joke:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56503

Well thats definitely a major issue, but what exactly are we meant to "wake up" to? We are all well aware that muslim extremists live in this country. But its a minority and it doesnt reflect all british muslim. We need to remove those select individuals who try to promote the violence! We shouldnt judge an entire culture, just because of the actions or words of a few! I seem to remember it wasnt that long ago this country was being bombed by the IRA, should we have thrown every Irishman and women into jail and accused them of being terrorists?

Laughable! Sounds like Citizen Smith, leader of the Tooting Popular Front, threating to put people "against the wall" come the day of the "revolution" which I believe he was masterminding from his girlfriend's mother's back bedroom. These people don't represent Muslims en masse any more that the British National Party represents the citizenship of Great Britain. The people in the article are completely inconsequential and insignificant. I'm amazed anybody bothers to write articles about these political and religious pigmies.

Precisely, Derek and Simon. Obviously, these lunatics need to be kept an eye on and arrested as soon as they incite violence against others.

The quality of our state education system is fundamental to our countries future; this is obvious.

What annoys me is the continual media interpretation that the only good states schools are Grammars. My children attend a comprehensive in the constituency of Sedgefield. It is, for want of a better description, a "bog standard" comprehensive, with the percentage of free school meals at about the national average.

What are not "bog standard" though, are the results, with 93% getting 5A-C GCSE.

This is no exam factory though, with a level of respect between pupils and staff and a very positive outlook throughout the school.

What this proves is that with the correct ethos and quality of leadership / teaching and community support the comprehensive system can work very well indeed. All this without selection at 11 leaving resulting in a two tier system the backers of grammars would prefer.

What is vital however, is that the success of centres of excellence as in Hurworth should be built upon and invested-in. Their good-practice should shared with other schools and recognition given to this success, regardless of political imperitive.

Unfortunalty Hurworth, despite being in the fomer PMs constituency, has suffered from years of under-investment, culiminating in a closure proposal in 2005.

Eventually, following huge community outrage, Blair intervened and the closure proposal dropped.
Today the school goes from strength to strength as a Foundation school (out of LEA control)but, without that capital investment its long term future must remain uncertain.

So if the new PM is serious about quality state education, he must invest not only in the areas where schools are failing, but also in those schools which can help lead improvement and success, across the social and class divide.

But are grades meaningful anymore? Academic success, at least as far as grades goes, has been rising every year for years in this country; but in Europe grades awarded by the Swiss examining body that administers the International Baccalaureate have stayed pretty much the same for the last twenty years. What's going on? Are British children becoming more clever and hard working and children from the rest of Europe staying the same, or are the exams set in this country becoming easier and progressively devalued year on year as a consequence? It used to be that A-level grades were determined by two three hour formal written examinations; now part of the grade is determined by course work (with which students may have been coached, had help or pondered over for hours). Here's my suggestion about how to determine whether today's A-level students are as bright as they used to be: select fifty students and get them to sit the examination papers set for their subjects in the 1970s to see how they compare. I'm willing to bet that most of them would drop a couple of grades lower than they achieved in contemporary exams. I for one firmly believe that GCSEs and A levels ARE getting easier, which is not good news for anyone, least of all the tens of thousands of students who, after years of work, end up with worthless qualifications.

Thanks your posting has been really usefull, unlike others who consider typos in someones posting a point to pick on. Instead of actually answering my question. Thanks again.

Cheer up son. One thing all MPs need to survive is a thick skin. Another thing they ought to have, in an ideal world, is an independent mind and a sense of humour. Lighten up Blub. I was JOKING when I criticised your posting! The truth of the matter is: what you say matters more than the way you say it.
And you are saying something worth listening to. I apologise if my sense of humour offended you. This wasn't my intention.

sorry, I apologised earlier and I'll apologise again. I am so used to adults not taking me seriously because of my age I automatically jump to the conclusion that again I am the butt of a joke. Also I dont mean to sound defensive and you were write it was a pretty poorly written post.

No. I was wrong. But I've never voted Conservative, ever, in the whole of my life and never intend to! So I can't be all bad can I?

I go to colyton grammar and i am doing a "mock parliament" at school and you guessed it im a labour MP. If any of you are labour supporters id be really gratefull if you could give me your views on whether there should be grammar schools in britain. (by the way dont ignore me because of my age i hate agist people, i have the intelligence, just not the height.)

Let me ask you this, if you became an MP at such a young age, how would you tackle anti-social behaviour? What kind of "real life" experience have you had of being young in the UK? Are you from a middle-class or rich family and been protected from the harshness of life or have you actually witnessed or been on the recieving end of violence and hatred? I ask, because alot of MPs are just rich, momas boys who have probably never been attacked, mugged or shouted at in their lives (*coughDavidCameron*)! All probably went to oxbrigde and would have a clue what a chav is if it walked up and knocked them in the face. So are you the typical posh Grammar student? or are you level headed?

Thanks for your reply no I am not the typical toffee nosed grammar student I consider myself pretty level headed. I know I am Lucky to get into the school I am in and believe me, certainly not middle class or rich-ish.Also I completely know what chavs are like, my town is full of them.

It is rubbish that all grammar school kids are toffy nosed and there are planty from working class backgrounds. Bright kids are better served by grammar schools as they specialise in pushing them and it has been shown that a kid in a grammar school gets, on average a grade higher than the same kid who went to a comprehensive school. And, as for the silly politically correct argument that kids who don't get in are somehow 'scarred' for life, this is ridiculous. What are we to do, wrap them up in cotton wool and never let them attend job interviews, play competitive sports or enter competitions of any kind. Grammar schools have served this country well and more should be built.

"I know I am Lucky to get into the school ...."

That is my point. You may have been lucky to get into the Grammar, but what of all the others who are not?
Are they not deserving of a first class education too?
Comprehensive education CAN and DOES work when implemented correctly with quality leadership and enthusiastic staff.
Personally , I feel that no state school should apply any sort of selection. Therefore the simple answer to your question is No, there should be no state grammar schools.

If people wish to pay to send their kids to a selective school, that is there choice, but we as taxpayers should not pay for this socially divisive system.

By the way, our comprehensive school ourperforms both of the local private schools, with 5a-c gcse @ 93% and a "value added" index taking it into the top 1% of state schools nationally, way above many grammars.

So it can be done.

So it is ok for people musically talented to go to an acadamy of music where they recieve a top notch musical education. It's ok for people who are talented at drama to go to a theatre school where they recieve the best education for their subject. Yet for people who are academically talented it isn't ok for them to go to a school where their abilities can be pushed further? It is right then, for them to be held back by others and not reach their full potential as they were never pushed?

I am afraid you are missing the point.
There is no reason why any student however "academically talented" should be "held back" at a comprehensive.

All students of whatever ability, should be allowed to maximise their potential, and this is perfectly capable of being delivered within the comprehensive system. It is all down to quality of leadership and teaching, together with support of parents.
Our school is evidence of that.

The alternative is a selective system where childrens life chances can be ruined at the age of 11.

Grammar schools are state schools as well and are just catering for a particular set of special needs children, the ones that require more challenging education than others and can be better served in an educational environment that specialises in this. The young person was undoubtedly being modest when saying the word ‘lucky to get in’ and I should surmise that it is more the case that he/she worked hard at primary school and has earned his/her place there. I fail to understand why so many people in this country feel that they have to be somehow apologetic about their abilities and/or achievements towards others and feel embarrassed that they are bright and got into a grammar school. It seems strange to me. Even in the communist countries, they had schools that catered for the academically bright and, quite rightly so, these are the people that bring the nation’s bread and butter home and they need to be stretched for the benefit of all and grammar schools do a better job of it than many of the comprehensive schools.

I think what people dont like, is how those Gramma schools and better educations are out of reach of most families. They are for the elite middle and upper classes who have the money to send their kids there. I think its great that a young prodergy should go to the best school, but alot of these kids are only in a "Gramma school" education because their parents are rich! Its not because their intelligent or deserve to be there. Those are places which could be given to less fortunate children, who cant afford it! But why should the better educations only be provided by privatedly funded grammar schools?

This is a point I completely agree with. However not one person for that matter, in my class are there because they can afford to be, they are all there on they're own merit. The only reason grammar schools are associated with the middle and upper classes is because people associate them as caring most about childrens education. Getting the best education you can depends not on everyone but the individual, and without grammar schools then how would these students who can be pushed further be pushed further?

wow started a bit of a debate there ( and I'm replying to my own post which is a bit sad but there you go) It is a bit further down but no although I feel the 11 plus is wrong grammar scools are not in principle. The comps in my area are so concentrated on the less able students that the ones who could be pushed further are having to wait whilst the rest of the class are being brought up to standard. Plus I cant remember who it was who said I have no idea of the education system, I think that I do, Im in it.

Blub's right. The real reason Grammar Schools are associated with the middle classes is that middle class parents, aware of the importannce of secondary education, often try extremely hard to secure a grammar school place for their children - more so than other less motivated parents and guardians. Many middle class parents pay for private tuition to "prep" their children for the invidious 11-plus as well as buying books, chemistry sets, art materials and musical instruments for them. Middle class parents often encourage their children to take an interest in current affairs, taking them on trips to galleries, museums, theatres, concerts etc., etc., and so expose them to literature, science, history, art and culture from an early age. You can't blame people for doing that can you? That said, in my view, the 11 plus is still wrong in principle and practice. Making a snap judgement which determines the educational future of anybody at eleven seems to me to be just plain daft! However, having said that, the situation today is much better than it used to be twenty years ago. If you miss out at eleven you can still take GCSEs, A levels, degrees etc., later in your life by becoming a mature student, going to night school or joining a distance learning body. You can't really blame everything on selective education because in this day and age education is available to all people, of all ages, everywhere.

Sorry forgot to add;
Blub said;
"The only reason grammar schools are associated with the middle and upper classes is because people associate them as caring most about childrens education."

You are correct in that many people do associate the middle classes with caring most about education. So what of those from working class backgrounds in a deprived area, perhaps some with unsupportive parents less interested in education? they would almost certainly not get into a Grammar age 11, however gifted they eventually may prove to be.
But in a good comprehensive that child could be offered a supportive environment where he or she could flourish. This opportunity would maximised the young persons life chances and help turn-around attitudes towards education that have been perpetuated for generations.

Blub said "Getting the best education you can depends not on everyone but the individual, and without grammar schools then how would these students who can be pushed further be pushed further?"
What makes you think high achievers cannot be "pushed" within the comprehensive system? I am afraid you appear to have no understanding of what a good quality comprehensive education has to offer.
It is not about dumbing down to the lowest common denominator, but an inclusive system where ALL children are offered an equal opportunity to maximise their potential.
Not written off at 11 by a self-perpetuating class-ridden selection process that is embedded in the Grammar system.
Unfortunalty there remain far to many examples where the comprehensive system is failing the young people too, through poor leadership and often lea management. But it can and is done where the quality management, leadership and staffing structure is in place.

Your also under the miss-conception that your standard state school isnt capable of providing a good, high quality education? You dont need to be shipped off to some posh gramma school to be taught well and be the best you can. There are alot of high quality state schools that churn out good students all the time. Plus your only talking about highschool and 6th form. While those are important educations, your main education comes from University. You learn alot more about life in University then you do in highschool and college. You become alot more independant. You could have one lad who goes to a gramma school and another who goes to a state school, and they both end up at Newcastle-University.... does that mean the gramma school kid will get a 1st, while the state school kid gets a 2.2? There is more to education then just learning numbers and words and science and art. There is life experience, knowing how to interact with others and being indepedant. You could be the most intelligent person in school, but once you get into the real world you cant cope because you have no street experience or you dont know how to interact with people because you've been sheltered all your life from the bad side of life.

And what parent in their right mind would want their child to gain the type of 'street experience' that exists in this country today? Not one that cares, at least. I would never send my kid to some of these rotten schools where children are corrupted by the values of ill discipline, disrespect and ignorance of the 'street' and pick their schools very carefully indeed. There are good schools here, but you need to be good at picking them.

My point was purely that good state schools do exist, and that parents shouldnt have to send kids to grammar schools in order to get a good education. When I talked about "street experience" I merely meant having experience of being outside the house and interacting with others of different backgrounds and cultures and knowing how to respect them and not judge them. If your a prep-kid whos parents send you off to bording school or grammar school and you only ever hang out with the "posh totty" then you're not going to get a real perspective on life and the different types of people in the world. State schools may not always be perfect and alot of absolute dives. But atleast you get more experience of "real life". I dont like to express this opinion, but there is some truth in that if you get bullied or picked on, or you experience harrassment, it makes you stronger. If you experience nothing but an isolated, protected life and never know the meaning of pain or suffering, then you you cant handle it when you actually get into the real world. I learnt that the hard way of working in safeway for 4 years. I was such a niave person who thought the best of everyone because I had never took harrassment from a person. I soon realised from working in a shop, in the heart of newcastle what people are really like. Had I not worked there, I might still be that niave person. Its the best experience I ever had in growing and learning.

Fair enough on street wise. Obviously, \cocooning kids is not good for them and they do need a certain degree of exposure to the real world. Do remember that grammar schools are state schools and are open to children from all walks of life and there are indeed poor kids and ones that come from various backgrounds studying at grammar schools. People are mixing up two different issues here; one being PRIVATE schools where one has to have a lot of money to benefit from smaller class sizes and the other being GRAMMAR schools that are free at source and accept anyone who has the ability to work at an above average level and needs extra challenge above and beyond the norm. Yes, there are some good comprehensives and, provided that they are streamed according to ability, I have no problem with them. But there are some bloody awful ones as well and I would sooner send my kids to the locla zoo to mix with gibbons and chimpanzees than send them to the bad ones!

I give up on trying to understand how many different schools there are. Private, state, comprehensive, grammar, blah blah blah, thats too much for my brain to handle!

I cant that I've ever considering the middle of upperclasses to be "caring most about childrens education". Where did you get that impression from? I generally associate the middle and upper classes with putting pressure on their kids to be "like their parents" and to be "successfull", so they ship them off to gramma schools to feel good about themselves.

Many poor kids go to grammar school as well and they are not all from middle class backgrounds. Moreover, I have spoken to many kids who attend these schools and they do not all have parents that wnat them to be carbon copies. Inmost cases, their parents wnat them to go on to do what makes them happiest in life.

Thats great and I would never be-grudge a parent for wanting whats best for their child. I just dont think its right for parents to think you need a grammar school to get the best education. It may have its benefits, but its bound to have a negative side in other life experience as I've explained above.

Fair enough then!

I reckon your Grammer isn't doing such a great job in its English classes judging from your posting. Firstly, the first person singular personal pronoun (I) should always be written in upper case, i.e., I not i, I'm not i'm and I'd not i'd and certainly not id (if you're studying psychology you find out about the id when you get to the chapter about Sigmund Freud). Secondly, there's only one l in grateful. Britain should begin with a capital letter and when you include a whole sentence in parenthesis the first word should begin with a capital letter.

Sorry but you only get four out of ten marks.

Should try harder.

1)these are typos I apologise for these. 2) I am writing at a* GCSE already in yr 8 so ill thank you not to critise my english skills. I am familliar with the id as I study psycology at home. Also if you wish to critise someone elses keyboard\english skills check your own, grammar is spelt with an A.

Don't take it to heart Blub. I was only pulling your leg. And you're right, grammar IS spelt with an A. I stand corrected.

sorry I didnt mean to sound tetchy I often dont understand peoples sense of humor and take it literally sorry! :-)

Has anyone notice how shallow and farcical politics has become in the United Kindom?

Let me give an example. I was in America prior to our '97 and heard republicans injecting the sound bite "hard working families" into their speeches time after time in a brainless ludicrous fashion. Imagine my surprise when I returned to the UK to find that New Labour had imported and pilfered the same catch phrase and were chanting it like a mantra over here. Blair and his acolytes used it to death saying it time after time in speech after speech, writing it time after time in article after article, obviously advised to do so by some psychologist, publicist or spin doctor. The catchphrase "hard working families" ended up so risible that cartoonists in newspapers began joking about it and satirising it.

I hope that Gordon Brown, if he decides to stoop to such pathetic "brain washing" tactics, will at least invent his own cliches rather than getting them second-hand from the USA.

You already stole the term "New Deal" from Franklin Delano Roosevelt, possibly the greatest President America ever had.

Be better than this, Gordon,

Don't insult the intelligence of the British by behaving like your predecessor.

Well, you've got to laugh.

Here I am replying to my own posting but yesterday, in the House of Commons, that sad old back number John Denham worked my favourite numbskull sound bite into his first speech for a long time as a minister. I'm talking about the hoary old American chestnut "hard working families". Ha, ha, ha! Nice one John but no points for originality. Still, start as you mean to go on I say. Incidentally, for those of you who don't know Denham was the Labour MP (I use the term loosely) who advocated shanghaiing innocent unemployed people into longer "sentences" of "community service" than those meted out to criminals by the courts as punishment!

“Wha’ya do Nosher to get thirteen weeks community service?”

“Burgled a few churches and assaulted a copper.”

“Wha’he do to get twenty six weeks on the chain gang?”

“Nothing Holmes. He’s unemployed is all.”

Employers must pay the minimum wage to all workers but the government sees nothing wrong in forcing the unemployed to work for their Jobseeker's allowance, i.e., about £1.90 per hour, under threat of destitution and homelessness if they refuse.

And that popeyed arch-Blairite John Hutton is still in his cabinet. Hutton was the man who boasted about installing lie detectors in the DSS to screen telephone calls made by welfare claimants in an attempt to catch out the odd bad apple attempting fraud. Of course the overwhelming majority of these claimants were innocent… innocent until unemployed that is. Hutton you plonker, it’s 2007 not 1984! If Denham and Hutton are in cabinet what does that say about the dearth of talented people in the Parliamentary Labour Party? And don’t get me started on Hazel Blears!

A bit worrying isn’t it?

Keep you ears open for more instances of "hard working families".

Laugh and then despair.

These men and women are your lawmakers.

Architects are saying that new houses on flood prone land should have the living quarters on the first floor to cut down on the cost of financial claims. I would suggest that water tight doors and windows could be made to fit all houses in danger from flooding that could be triggered automatically or manually in the event of a power cut. Ladders could be fitted that would descend to ground level in the event of a need to escape, such emergency ladders have been in use in US properties for decades. On top of this, there may be a need to build houses that have to take the pressure of occasional flood water to a more exacting standard so that they will not collapse.
With it looking increasingly more likely that there could be a one meter increase in sea levels there is not going to be enough land that is flood proof to build new houses on. I suggest that converting houses to cope with occasional flooding would be appropriate.
Social engineering could be used to ensure that people lived and worked in areas that were not subject to flooding. By using the five Buxton Coefficients of Unemployment in areas that are safe could create more than full employment in these areas so that people move to them from the areas that are prone to flooding. As the five Buxton Coefficients bring in more revenue for the Chancellor than he has to spend in implementing them then the economy would be more healthy as a result without having to spend a great deal of money on permanent flood defences that have to be built to last.

We could just not build houses in areas prone to flooding! I agree that better houses to withstand floods is a good idea, but where is the funding from that going to come from? It would simply increase houses prices AGAIN and it would be a commodity only available to the rich. Who could afford a house that would have water tight windows and doors?

And its not new houses that are being effected. Its existing houses that have already been built on flooded areas that need help. Those areas need flood defenses put in place, to prevent it happening again.

Curbing the greenhose effect might be a better idea.

Yes like making the employer who BULLYIED, DISCRIMINATED, & sacked a train driver with 30 years experience for his disability/injury & for reporting health & safety issues instead of him sitting at home all day with the central heating on instead of driving trains may go some way to helping the greenhouse effect ????

Can you rewrite your posting in plain english, Joanna, so I can understand better what you're driving at?

Are you angry at a bad employer who sacked someone you know unjustly, which person now spends his days in a centrally heated home and contributes more to global warming, carbonwise, than he would have done were he still in work?

Is that it?

What ya reckon?

Derek you have hit the nail on the head.
I should have added all the kettles he boils as well.

TV free view box, On all day as well.

Joanna you're making a serious point but you are genuinely a funny lady. I hope you comment on other people's postings.

The government is in serious need of some young blood. From my understanding, the youngest MP is in his 30s and he was heralded as being young!! Where are the all the 20 year old MPs? the people who would actually understand and have a connection to the youth culture of this country? This country is run by middle-aged men and women who (sorry) look like they were dress by their mothers, with their come-overs and stiff upper lipps. We need fresh blood, from the younger generation to rule this country, or to tackel issues that handle teenagers and kids! You cant honestly believe that a man in his 40s or 50s is going to understand how to handle a hoody?

Yep. That's all we want. Dozens of brash, ambitious, thrusting, inexperienced youngsters with no knowledge of or experience of the real world. Twenty-somethings who have never known what it is like struggling to bring up a family or losing your job, home or business. People who have never seen what it's like when the country goes into recession or slump. Youngsters with no memory of history, of what our country was and what it has become.

Yep. Just what we want. A gaggle of self-seeking post-adolescents with their eyes on the main chance. Vying with each other to please the current leader and secure their next promotion.

I'd rather see politicians of substance and character; intelligent, free-thinking men and women, hopefully with compassionate hearts, who represent the interests of the people who elected them rather than those of their party.

Age matters less to me than soul.

Instead you would rather have 30-60 years old MPs, who thinks a piece of paper, a fine or a hug is going to stop yobs from attacking people? Yeah, thats experience and wisdom shining through isnt it!!!

Why should a 40 or 50 year old man wnat to handle a hoody. There is a bit more to governing a society, economy and polity than knowing the latest pop song or wearing the most fashionable designer label. Experience, knowledge, education, common sense are what are required to do this job effectively and all of these come with age.

Did I mention knowing the latest pop tunes and fashions? No! I was talking about understanding what drives the youth of this country into being how they are. MPs seem to be under the idea that a piece of paper, a fine or a hug is going to stop some yob from attacking someone in this country. Explain to me how their "wisdom" and "experience" is shining during that logic? We need disoplin in this country, and the ability to defend ourselves and actually teach these yobs what respect is.

I agree with you. Sadly, some people need to be given an unpleasent consequence for their actions (dare I say 'punishment' in this politically correct era) in order for them to change. I believe in giving a fair warning so that the person has the opportunity to reflect and the change. But, after that, assertive action is needed and an end to hot air and paliatives.

A perfect example of that is this.... I had a group of young kids (13-14 years old) giving me abuse everytime I walked passed them in my street after work. I let them go on for 2 weeks, and then I snapped and told them (in a certain context) to stop doing it otherwise I would have to do something. Simply put I didnt hear a peep from them for ages. Then last week I was walking past them, and one had his camera phone out and another had a hallowean mask on. One shouted at me and obviously didnt expect me to react. I turned around and walked right up to him and told him (the PG version) to "move along" for his own sake. The lad was absolutely terrified and screaming "no no noo" and ran off!! I've passed them since, and not had a word! But I would call that ample warning, so if I get anymore from them they are getting the full blown "consiquences"!

You would/will get some people saying "well just ignore them" or "tell their parents". My responce is quite simple. Ignoring it wont help because they continue, and telling their parents will do nothing because their parents wont care and certainly wouldnt do anything that I would concider "punishment" for being rude to someone.

You did well. I have experienced this sort of thing as well. They started to shout xenophobic insults at my wife until one day we turned on them and they now keep a distance. The only things such morons understand is force, I am sad to have to say.

One of the reasons I have switched off from politics is that no matter how well a party is doing it always has to compare records with it's predecesor.
If a specific policy is working then...great...please stop trying to score points over the Tories, it's regressive and not forward thinking in my opinion.

Also, I hope Gordon Brown does well as PM however, I am more than a little concerned about the possibility of lowering the voting age to younger than 18. I have 3 sons aged 20, 18 & 17 and despite the fact I love them dearly acknowledge they are also very immature and not at all responsible. they are most definately NOT alone.
I say, raise the age to 21 and lets get back to getting input from people who have some life experience.

Won't it be a bit odd to allow young people to vote while at the same time legally disallowed from driving cars, drinking alcohol in pubs or to be openly practicing homosexuals etc., etc?

I dont see an issue with lowering the age to vote. The issue is that the government doesnt tackel any issues concerning the youth of this country. There are no issues which they are interested in. Thats why so many just dont take an interest! If they actually tackelled issues like anti-social behaviour, underage drinking and underage sex then there is something for the youth culture to take an interest in. But the government doesnt! The government doesnt know how to handle anything concerning the younger generation because (and im sorry to say this), their all old! The youngest person in government is in his 30s! How do middle-aged men and women understand how to tackel youth issues?

Strange! Older people knew how to deal with anti social behaviour in the past. Just takes a bit of balls and a willingness to take no nonsense when kids get out of hand. Too many silly middle class liberal types that don't understand that kids need a firm hand sometimes and boundaries set for their own good.

Trouble is if you remonstrate with young people, lay hands on them or use any kind of physical force against them the Police will arrest YOU for assault or threatening behaviour or whatever!

I can rmeeber a few years ago when an older policeman in a small village gave a young lad a clip around the earhole and then a word with his folks back home. This is how things were done years ago and it is sad that it is not done today. Nowadays, it is paperwork, interviews, long winded action plans etc.

I actually agree and that was my point. Years ago you would get a clip around the ear for being anti-social, but now you get an ASBO or a hug from David Cameron. Its like all the older MPs have gone soft! But they dont just realise that a clip around the ear and being "told off" isnt enough anymore. You need to be extremely harsh with these kids or they just laugh at you. A piece of paper means nothing to them. Im im 24, so if I realise that....

There's hope for you yet, then! I agree with you in this area 100%. Like you, I am not against a clip around the earhole and taking tough measures when necessary. I am not impressed by people that continually smack their kids or do it with undue severity, but I am not against a reasonable smack from time to time and, used wisely, it can help to reinforce good behaviour. It has doen in mine and I think that our expectations help them to feel settled and secure as they know the boundaries. Obviosuly, we mostly laugh and have fun and show affection. But there are times when they need reminding and if we issue a threat, it is never an empty one.

Schools Question TIme BBC One, Thursdays at 22:35 BST. Its a pity parties were not asked to put forward their young hopefuls, instead Malcolm Rifkind (age 721) sits on the panel. But at least the audience are young.

I always laugh at how 30-60 year old MPs are meant to be experts on situations that involes kids and teenagers. Most probably dont even know what a hoody is, let alone a chav. Most probably come from an era when sex was a tabo until you were 25. We need young MPs in government who understand the youth culture. I would love to see an MP on television who didnt look like his mother dressed him, with a comb over and speaking the queens english.

It seems to me that all "yoof" culture consists of is passively submitting to whatever trends older businessmen have declared as fashionable. Rock morphs into New Romantic morphs into Punk morphs into Rap morphs into HipHop and so on with old snake oil merchants like Malcolm McLaren promoting their wares and making money out of the younger generations disaffection and gulliblility. Young people seem stupider today considering themselves "rebellious", "unique" and "different" from older folk when in fact they're just foot soldiers in an army of counter-culture clones, doing what they're told, without an original idea between them.

Blimey, some youngsters I know can only tell the time with digital clocks and wear slip-on shoes because that never mastered the difficult art of tying up their shoelaces!

I was getting more at the point that these "older" MPs seems to think an ASbos telling them they cant wear a hoody is going to stop them going out and attacking someone. Concider this is the same "older" MPs who made it illegal to smack a child when they miss-behave, and told teachers they can on longer shout at pupils! Thats what I was getting at! They just dont seem to understand how to handle the anti-social youth of this country.

You're 100% right! Youngsters know there's no real penalty for bad behaviour and so there's no reason for the worst behaved among them to behave lass badly.

Most of them now were in the 1960s. I think that they know what sex, drugs and rock n roll are, my dear boy. Mush more fun than in this grey, conformist age.

So where did all their hip-groovyness go? Why is this country like a stale old muffin? a country where kids are told that sex is bad and DONT do it, instead of being told the truth and spoken to with respect.

For me, Thatcher was the worst thing that ever happened to this country, to be quite honest. I think that she went too far. I am not totally against many aspects of economic liberalism, but when applied too much, it can have a very negative impact on soial cohesion and creates a free for all where crass individualism rules the day. I agree that, in Britian, sex is not taught well. I shall teach my kids that it is a wonderful positive thing and be open about it when they are th eappropriate age, but that it is powerful as well and one can lose self esteem if you sell yourself too cheap as well as the obvious - precautions. I like the way they do it in Sweden (teaching it, I mean!) they are open about it with no guilt feelings, no complexes and it works; they have a far lower incidence of teenage pregancies then in the UK.

You're dead right. People vote for governments in the hope that they will act to make life better, not surrender everything to the "market", which seems to me like surrendering your future to a roll of the dice. In a democracy governments that behave like this and stand by while others suffer eventually get voted out of office. (The current government is doing this in respect to social housing amongst many other things.) But what did you expect from a daft old bat that denied such a thing as "society" existed?

The worst thing of all about is that she squandered much of the oil revenue that came from the North Sea. It all went down the plug hole propping up he regime.

Well now we have a government that tries to blame anti-social behaviour on "deprived areas" and "bad educations". Suggesting its impossible to find anti-social behaviour in the middle and upper-classes. You never hear about your cambridge student going out on a bender, starting a fight and knocking someone out with one punch. You only ever hear about the council estate chavs in tracksuits. Its alot easier to blame their "environment" because they come from a council estate. What can you blame, when the cambridge student, whos been spoilt all his life, starts behaving anti-social?

Yes. Nothing is anybody's fault anymore. Nobody is ever personally to blame. Teenagers are badly behaved because they're bored and have nothing to do. People assault others because they're suffering from "road rage" and weren't responsible for their own actions and so on. Bad behaviour is bad behaviour in my book and badly behaved people ought to be dealt with and held responsible for what they do and have done.

Well at least they speak nicely when they're pissing in the gutter!

I always laugh at the way politicians trumpet their success and ignore their manifest failures, betrayals and deceipts.

It's a bit like a child abuser crowing about his had ten children, nine of which he brought up compassionately only beating the living daylights out of one on a regular basis!

We now have record levels of homelessness and debt. Over a million people are on Council house waiting lists. Hundreds of thousands are living in "hellhole" accommodation with three or more generations of the same family squeezed into the same house.

Over the last ten years the government offered NO solutions, despite its promises, and NO sympathy towards the plight of the poor.

Shame on all MPs, bar a few rebels with metel and convictions, who let this go on unchallenged.

Shame on Gordon Brown for being forced into doing something he should have been eager to do if he believed in even a watered down form of social justice and equity.

I am homeless and living in a hellhole (Sorry Hostel) The worst thing is I want to go back to work but cannot because ALL of my wages would be taken to pay the £290 a week the gowernment pay for my 7x7ft room.
This means I have to claim £85 in benfits to sustain myself. However under last conservative government I would have been living in a cardboard box.

my comments you the labour party are only thinking of number one not the english people must as to say you have put us in now shut up let us run the country You have just sold us to the eu with the signing of a piece of paper.I dont feel that i can trust the labour now or ever We the english people want a refurendum now not when it is to late fly the english flag now not when we are under eu ruling WAKE UP MR BROWN

This is the Britain Labour is working hard to build

Under Sharia Britain will suffer:

-Loss of freedom
-Increased sexual assault
-Slavery
-Despotism
-Increased violence
-Forced conversion to Islam

Who cares about smoking in public, Britain is being invaded right under your noses. I'm from Canada, and everyone here knows that you guys are in big trouble. Wake up!

Hello, my name is Lisa Holbrook and I live in Hull. In 2003 I became a single parent when my partner walked out on me and my two children. I had returned that year to college to study at A-level with plans to go to university. I have worked hard over the last four years and have just finished my PGCE.
Throughout my time at university I struggled very hard financially due to the fact that I had to take out a student loan, this loan was classed as my income by benefit agencies so I was denied any financial help.
At this time I was raising two children alone, doing a full time university course and working part time in order to get by.
I have now qualified as a teacher and will, come Sept, be on a starting salary of £20,000.
I was incredibly excited at this prospect until I realised that by the time I have paid tax, national insurance, student loan payments and council tax I will not financially be any better off.
Also with the rise in house prices I cannot afford to buy a house that is large enough for myself and my two children.
I would like to know what it is Labour is going to do to help people like me? I have worked hard to get where I am, yet I feel that it is all in vain.
I feel completely frustrated that there are people who live around the corner from me who do not work, they have their council tax and rent paid for them, their children get free school meals and clothing grants. They are allowed, it would seem, to sit out in their garden all day drinking alcohol without a care in the world. Some of these people have never had a job in their life, how can this be fair? Why should they be allowed to start and raise a family on benefit,
whilst people like me, (of which there are hundreds) work very hard for very little thanks?
There was a time when teaching was seen as a good career, it provided a middle class lifestyle. I would like to point out that it doesn't do that anymore.
I am still living in my council house, in a crappy area. I wanted a better life for myself and my children, all I have now is what I had before plus a twenty thousand pound debt.
I can assure you that I am not the only one who is frustrated and upset at my situation. What is it I can do to better myself and my family? Because believe me I have tried everything.
The country is crying out for good teachers; unless you can do something to help people like me then the problem is only going to get worse.
Again I ask you what can Labour do for people like me?

But are YOU a good teacher?

We've only got your word for it...

Yes I am a good teacher. I believe in discipline and a sense of humour. I have read the many messages about the youth of today; in my experience the problems stem from a lack of respect and a lack of self worth.
These children are often born into poverty, they lack values because the government has, with its benefit system, made pride and self worth a thing of the past. Stigma has been removed from being unemployed, single parents are no longer frowned upon, yet receive the brunt of the bad press.
People have to understand that single parents fall into two categories: those who choose to be single parents and those who have been forced into the situation.

We can all complain until we're blue in the face, but lets face it; the like of Gordon Brown don't have to live near the problems we face. Their sheltered little lives allow them to sleep easily. They don't have to come home after a days work to find some drunken, drugged up yob collapsed outside of their house. Until they do we are a silent voice.

You're right kid. Sadly the days where people who served the community out of a sense of vocation were properly rewarded are long gone. When I was young a teacher was considered to be on the same level as a solicitor, accountant or other professional person. Mothers would boast, "My son is a teacher." Fathers would beam, "My daughter's got a B.Ed degree." A teacher was a person that was looked up to, respected and admired. Clever boys and girls often picked teaching as the career of choice and a qualified teacher had a salary large enough to enable them mortgage a nice house, go on foreign holidays, run a car and put something away for a rainy day. I've no idea why society's regard for the teaching profession declined in the way it has. Yesterday I heard that Gordon Brown intend to compel some children to stay on at school until their eighteen, overloading educators even more.

Before the 1997 election that sad old donkey John Prescott blathered on continuously about releasing the capital receipts from council house sale to build more "desperately needed homes". This was a lie. Then we had the competition to see which architect could design a "£60,000 house" which got no where. A scam. All the while New Labour spent BILLIONS on the Jobcentre plus and New Deal expressly to force more and more people into temporary, part-time and minumum wage jobs, jobs that attracted too low a wage to rent a private house let alone mortgage one. All the while Gordon Brown stood by while homelessness MORE THAN DOUBLED!How could any man or woman with a scintilla of "social conscience" behave like this?

I find the attitudes and platitudes of the "New Labour" party contemptible.

and not forgetting pete docherty this man has been found in possesion of class a drugs more times than enough and he still making music and doing as he pleases just cos he is famous he gets away with murder and kate moss should know better after all young teenagers look up to her what kind of an example is she setting send him to jail and ban him from making music if it was anyone else they would have been locked up years ago.my point being one rule for one and another for the rich and famous

The problem with Pete Docherty is he loves the attention. He only takes drugs because he thinks its cool, and he tries to tell people he is "from the streat", despite the fact he comes from a wel-off family in Hexham. It would actually be more effective if he entire world ignored him. He laps it up when the media chase him after he is arrested.

Now im not anti-immigrant, so dont get me wrong. But has anyone noticed how these 7 terrorists all happen to be immigrants? So again, we have more evidence of how the governments restrictions on immigration have worked SOOO well!! Do these people not have background checks? It seems too organised an attack to be random or spontanious. These 7 men will obviously have connections to a terrorist group somewhere. So how come our wonderfull government didnt pick up on it? But then again, this is the same government that allows pedophiles to work in schools!!!

Who is to say that these men were not radicalised whilst in this country ?(although the fact some of them entered in 2004 doesn't give a lot of time for them to go from well intentioned academics to ruthless terrorists I admit).
Although the men and women behind organised terrorism are intelligent people, albeit misguided and full of hate, who would have thought a group of doctors - people who choose a caring profession - would be so heavily involved in terror as to actually drive a car full of deadly gas, petrol & nails with the intent to kill and injure hundreds of innocents.
Unfortunately, from now onwards, we will be suspicious of anyone from the Middle East within the medical profession which is sad as the vast majority are hard working and dedicated people.

Degree Educaterd Yes, Intelligent No. Thank god for their sheer incompetance.
I think we should look at what country people are migrating from - the vast majority of people from these countries are very fine people indeed but I am not sure we can take the chance on those who are not. 4 Million chinese graduate from University every year, better surely to set up a programe to encourage some of them to fill vital posts within the UK.

They say it was more likely they were converted to extremists here in the UK. But they must have been picked out and targetted by someone. How did the government miss that? Its just too conveniant and organised to be a rushed thing. It must have been planned for a while, and before they came here. ARE CHECKS TOO MUCH TO ASK FOR?

am no racist but i think the government should toughen up on immagrants as were being over run with them taking our homes our jobs etc and doctors trying to blow airports up immagrant doctors so how can we trust them????

the police are tackling petty crimes cannabis etc ppl dont rob ppl to buy cannabis,alcohol causes more trouble than any drug and thats legal fair play for the fight against terrorism but thats about it cos the police arnt stopping cocaine or heroin flooding our streets the real danger........

Personally I favour legalising all drugs.
But I think putting Canabis on a pedestol is a mistake. I have plenty of experience of dealing with the impact of cannabis upon peoples mental health. More dangerous than alcahol, no definately not. But in truth nor are cocaine and heroin.

I agree. Surely it would be better to give junkies prescriptions for their poison (as well as clean needles etc). This would kill off drug dealing involving the criminal underworld, assaults and break-ins by addicts desperate for their next fix as well as reducing HIV and AIDS amongst intavenous drug users. The only downside is that junkies would poison themselves to death, but surely that's better than having them prey on innocent people?

New slogan for New labour

Don't strike up, spike up!

They just give the drug dealers ASBOS saying "your not allowed to sell drugs after 8 at night, now be nice"! Or we get "Hug a Druggy"!!!

I have heard so much about a new open politics, building trust, listening.
What I want to see is real meaningful engagement.

I want politicians to address publicly the ideas and thoughts of the British People. Now this will often mean explaining why things are the way they are in a sense an argument between government and the people - because that is what dialogue really is. But the fact is that many people take particular objection to politicians who are seen arguing against what they are saying.
The upshot being political success depends on pretending to agree with everything the public says. However it is a pretense and as politicans slide around trying to avoid answearing populist policies rather than explaining possible problems with populist policies they are increasingly despised as a breed for being dishonest.
We need to not only build trust in poluiticans we also need to build trust in experts. The debate on immigration has been truely productive, some of my more racist associates are starting to say things like - i don't mind people coming here if they are going to benefit the economy. And of course if over time the public don't accept your argument it is probably because you are wrong and should admit it.
We are one of the most enlightened and knowledgeble people the world has ever seen. The internet is making us more so every day. We can deal with hard truths about climate change, globalization, taxation - public spending. Inform us of what your thinking - hell Gordan Brown should have a blog - all misisters should have a blog - and really bloody honest ones at that.

I am horrified to read - at a time of renewed terrorist attacks on the UK - that Nelson Mandela is one of Gordon Brown's heroes. In his book,” Long Walk to Freedom”, Mandela says that he “signed off” with this act of terrorism. People should take a look at what Mandela “signed off” with while he was in prison – convicted for other acts of terrorism! President P.W. Botha told Mandela way back in 1985, that he could be a free man as long as he did one thing: Publicly renounce violence. Mandela refused. That is why Mandela remained in prison until the appeaser F.W. de Klerk freed him unconditionally. The bottom line is that Nelson Mandela never publicly renounced violence - and we should never forget that.

Freedom and democracy for South Africa's blacks would NEVER have happened without at least the implicit threat of violence. The ANC only began to adovocate violence after the Sharpville Massacre. Apartheid in South Africa was inhumane and abhorent.

There is a lot of chatter about sustainable development, but politicians 'interpret' the term to suit their 'Argument /Policy of the Day'.........


The following Link ( http://www.ace.mmu.ac.uk/esd/menu.html ) to ‘The Encyclopaedia of the sustainable Development’ has been written by the Atmosphere, Climate & Environment Information Progamme, and is supported by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs.......The link is very informative and easy to read. As it is suppported by DEFRA, I assume that it reflects Government Policy. If so, why are we not seeing roadbuilding as a LAST resort? (My own MP claims that new roads allow buses to travel faster, and are therefore part of a 'sustainable Development'). Am am I missing something, or am I correct in believing him to be a 'silly billy'?

The government has talked a lot recently about affordable housing but I'm concerned about what this actually means.

By definition more affordable housing means lower house prices, but politicians seem to think it means buying half a house or less at market rate (or higher as lots of shared ownership houses I've seen seem to be).

The effect of having everyone being able to buy half a house will be another massive rise in house prices, it will be catastrophic for future generations. More money will find its way to established homeowners and people starting out will have an ever bigger mountain to climb.

Mass extension of shared ownership is not the answer, far from it, the government must ensure anything it introduces doesn't inflate house prices further and make the problem worse.

Expect a lot of cock and bull about "shared equity" and "part-buy" schemes for homeowners. Don't expect anything vis-a-vis social housing to help the millions that can neither rent privately or mortgage.

I am concerned about all of the above, and - in addition - the way we are governed. Our new Leader has NOT got off to a good start in this regard. I applaud his stated intentions to restore Cabinet government, and have two cabinet meetings within two days of taking office. But he cannot expect to be seen as credible if at the same time he dictates structural and process changes inside the Labour Party as for example in the 'appointment' of Harriet Harman as Party Chair (she was elected Deputy Leader), creating 6 vice-chairs (the positions don't exist in the Rule Book), and proposing the abolition of contemporary motions at Conference without any prior warning or debate to the Party's National Executive Committee (diktat). If he has genuine political humility he would apologise and represent his ideas in an agreed constitutional manner. After all what will be the point of a written British constitution if the Labour Party's current written constitution is flouted so flagrantly.

Iam not a labour supporter i just wnted to ge this off my chest so todayis july 1st and the new smoking ban is in place and there is going and alrady are some very unhappy people in this dictatorship of a country we live in why do the mp in power have the right to tell people wat they can and cant do maby it is not nice for non smokers to have the smoke in there face but nobody is forcing them!

Nobody is forcing them? So when someone starts smoking at a table, opposite you in the pub and your getting wafts of smoke in your direction. We're expected to stand up and just leave? So its too much to ask that a mature adult, might not smoke for a few hours on a night out? I've said this about 10 times now.....Smokers have a CHOICE to smoke and inhail toxic fumes, they have a choice not to smoke for a few hours on a night out. Non-smokers (including bar staff) DONT have a choice but to sit there and endure it!!! Especially the case of bar-staff who have to stand there for hours on end, inhailing your smoke and waking up their clothes and hair stinking!!! So explain to me... how do bar staff have a CHOICE about inhailing your smoke?

I believe that there is a great need to improve literacy

Eye fink sow two.

Cieron, The time has come for all active citizens to engage in non violent disobedince in orer to remind this government that they are our servants and NOT our masters. Read Thoreau's essay called 'civil disobedience'. It tells us how we are not children, how the individual is more morally worthy to decide than the State and how it is our DUTY to make sure that it realises this throug peaceful, yet detrmined resistance and non compliance. The time is coming near where all citizens must come to the aid of what our forefathers fought for and the Labour Party is trying to take away from us' dignity, democracy, the right to determine our own lives as free people.

Regards

Simon

I was in Scotland recently, they have had the ban for a year. I was horrified and disheartened to discover the scots whom I had always admired as a freedom loving people had complied. I hope and prayer we in England show a little bit more reistence. The evidence on passive smoking is almost non existent. See Enstrom and Kabat a study that appeared in the British Medical Journal. This whole policy is a costly reaction to a health scare story with no basis in fact.

"The evidence on passive smoking is almost non existent" Oh...well thats ok then. That makes its all OK!!! If it almost non existant, then it must be fine!!! Trying to dissmiss passive-smoking is the same argument that pro-smokers use ALL the time. Are you honestly going to tell me that you think, inhailing the toxic fumes from a cigarette does no harm to a person? Would you sit there and breath smoke into a young babies face? Would you stick your mouth around the exhaust of a car and say "hey, this wont do any harm!!!" Get realistic.... stop trying to tell people that passive smoking isnt dangerious and think about it!! Thats like saying holding a fire-work wont blow your hand off!!

it is all a question of degree. Passive smokers inhale ridiculously small amounts of smoke comapared to people who actually smoke. Even people who do smoke onloy face serious risk if they smoke heavily over ten a day. You cannot remove risk you have to Cost Benefit the whole thing. Personally I would not breathe smoke into anybody face nor smoke within a public enclosed space because I think it is rude. Comparing sticking your mouth round an exhaust to inhaling a small amount of second hand smoke is absurd. I often find that holding fireworks helps you to get them out of the box.

"Passive smokers inhale ridiculously small amounts of smoke comapared to people who actually smoke." And thats an acceptable risk? So I dont choose to breath in those tiny, tiny, tiny amounts, but who cares!! How is that not infringing upon my rights as in individual? I dont want to inhail any toxins of any degree, if it can be avoided. Yes some people are conciderate enough not to smoke in confined places... but not all are! And unless everyone is, then you need these laws to make them be more conciderate!

Excuse me, would you please driving that car of yours, it's niot just polluting my environment, but everybody else's right around the world. Thank you for your co-operation. I'll send you a £50 fine in the next post.

Indeed if Simon 1 drives to
his pub and Simon 2 walks to the same pub. Then Simon 1 is putting Simon 2 at some, very small, risk. You cannot lagislate against all Risk. As the number of smokers is declining I feel sure none smoking pubs would soon have found a market. This particular legislation is an attack on smoking intended to make it less popular . In this respect it will work the number of smokers has declined dramatically in countries where bans have been introduced (USA, France, Ireland and Scotland). By socially marginalising smokers you have far more chance of 'controlling' them than simply by pointing to health risks or increasing taxes. I myself am under considerable peer pressure to quit smoking.

Quit because you want to quit. I shall probably quit soon or jsut smoke the odd cigar or something when I've had a drink, but not until I've given this sick ban a good run for its money and had my photo taken a few times.

Im personally not against people smoking aslong as it doesnt effect me. Quit if you want, or continue if you want. But if I have to sit in my local, with my eyes in absolute agony, because my contact lenses are drying out from the smoke and causing me pain.... well forgive me if im ANTI-SMOKING!! And I love how you keep using the car comparison. The car which is a necessity while the cigarette isnt!!

I'd like to know what it is you have against IT contractors. You seem obsessed with taxing us out of business with IR35 yet if we all decided to cease to be contractors the economy and civil service would fall apart.

Please can you explain EXACTLY what is meant by "paying your far share" and why it does not apply to the super rich?

Is paying corporation tax, employers national insurance, income tax and employees national insurance fair? I agree that minimum wage + dividends is not exactly fair either so where is the middle ground? We have to incorporate as Ltd companies in order to get work - can you not make it so that we can operate as sole traders and pay "our fair share"?

Everything you say about fairness is completely invalid as long as you bully the small businesses whilst billionaires pay less tax than their cleaners.

Please explain EXACTLY what is meant by terms like "fair share", "non complaince" (compliance with what exactly?) and "tax avoidance".

IT staff running their own companies are ideal targets for taxation, as the mere fact that they have put in the effort to start their own firms proves they are prepared to work. If you try and tax the Super-Rich, who have never worked a day in their lives, they will just leave, and stop paying you their annual "loans" for your campaign funds. Britain has just become one big Tax-Heaven for the ultra-rich.

1997 saw a wave of true optimism that the breakdown of our society could be halted, reversed & repaired. Tony Blair had the chance to be a truly great leader.

The dream was broken on Spin, Money (Bernie E) and worst of all, the illegal war in Iraq that smashed our ability to tell anyone anywhere what to do.

New Labour should have been high minded and principled to ensure the Tory sickness of 'self' was kept from power for 25 years.

The Tories are coming & we can only hope Mr Brown is strong enough to bring the dream back from the edge. An empty Mr Cameron is far more dangerous than a driven Thatcher.

Want all the talents Mr Brown, how about honest politics & a willingness to change by really taking the people seriously - this is our country not the governments.

You seem to be under some strange delusion that you live in a democracy.

i would like to congratulate mr brown on his appointment to the top job. i hope he will make britain a better place, and also help make britains image abroad slightly better than the current situation (especaiily in the middle east). well you could say that the work of the newly appointed foreign secretary is vital if britain is to have some sort of restored respect on the international scene. it has to be said that tony blair hasnt done gordon brown any favours when its comes to foreign policy.
gordon brown to me seems competent enough for this job, afterall he has been the second most powerful person in british politcs for the past ten years.
the inovative ideas for the new departments are very encouraging.
the cabinet has a few young personalities, but the issue is that, there aren't enough ethnic minorities, and there are only a handful of women. i would praise tony blair in that sense , because his cabinet was fairly mixed.

I know someone who has poor eyesight and is unemployed. He is perfectly capable of working... he used to be a network engineer. But it's not worth him working now. His benefits package is worth over £24500 a year! That's nearly £25k without even getting out of bed. I just don't see the point in working anymore.

Jesus is said to have walked on water.

Well, okay. It might have happened.

Tony Blair said he was a "straight kind of guy".

Hum. Difficult to swallow, but I suppose he might have been once or twice.

Nathan says his unemployed aquaintance gets £25,000 a year in benefits.

Pull the other one Nate!

Nobody's going to believe that!

I have a friend with schizophrenia he wants to work but he cannot despite having an engineering degree. He gets £3000 a year and can barely feed himself. If anyone can tell me how he can get £25k a year I will pass on the good news because he deserves some good news.

Because you are NOT like they are. Wanting change is one thing, joining in the rot is quite another.

Thats Ironic, Because if you read the post, He said the bloke CAN work, Just like Nathan CAN and maybe does work, but because the silly labour give him 25,000 a year for doing NOTHING, he is not going to work. Why is Labour giving this idle bugger money to do noting when he CAN work? Like I said...ITS A SPIT IN THE FACE OF THE WORKING MAN.

And just how do they know he can work? Trouble with most people is that they THINK they know. Yes there are many scroungers; many however are not. Blaim the 'experts' who allow this, not the goverment that seeks to protect the weak and the vulnerable - perhaps you would like to see the work houses back?

"And just how do they know he can work?"

IT SHOULD BE THE GOVERNMENTS RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW. THEY TAKE OUR TAX AND PAY HIM TO DO NOTHING, SO THEY SHOULD KEEP CHECKING AND GET THE IDLE BUGGER BACK IN WORK. This is why I get angry, because once they are on it, THATS IT. Made for life. They are too lazy to keep checking them and say "time to get a job" They know what I am earning and taxing me, so why should he/they get away with sitting on their arse doing nothing and I and everyone else work hard and get taxed? I would prefer the work houses back and the death penalty. Its the only way this country is ever going to get back into shape. Half of the people on the dole are criminals anyway, walking around, robbing peoples houses whilst they are at work...all supported and paid for by the labour government.

Why do the rabidly anit-welfarists think Jobseeker's Allowance is bad while holding their own hands out to receive Tax Credits, themselves another kind of hand out. I'm on a good salary and, yes, get more in tax credits on top of that salary than the unemployed have to live on in toto. Funny old world ain't it?

Prime Minister Brown, I’d like to raise a more lighthearted issue. All great civilizations have their particular “look”. Maybe it would be nice to mark the beginning of your era by smartening the overall appearance of the state – the mise-en-scene of the British scene. Nowadays its hard to tell the difference between a British policeman and a lollipop man. It's no wonder people don't fear the police. Whatever happened to uniforms? Sometimes I get the impression that modernity is an untucked shirt.

Basically, I would like an answer from Labour, Why people should get up and go to work and work hard and stress, whilst labour pays all these idle buggers our money to do noting all day. Ever wondered why you always see so many people walking about all day? BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL ON THE STATE. Explain to me, why people who are supposed to have NERVE trouble, get paid benefits to go into public places, drink, laugh and gamble, sit in the sun in the summer, stay warm in the winter, whilst other people have to go out to work. LABOUR SUPPORTS IDLE BUGGERS, NOT THE WORKING MAN. These idle buggers dont worry about nothing. Bills, stress, NOTHING. They do what they want all day on our money and labour lets them. They put them on benefits and leave them on, no questions asked. WHAT A DISGRACE AND A SPIT IN THE FACE TO THE WORKING MAN

Do you get tax credits by any chance laddie?

I have spent the last few years suffering from and working with people with varying degrees of mental illness. I have seen two sides of the coin. Genuinely very ill people who are too proud to claim they are debilitated so they just get £75 a week, don't have children they don't feel they can support and yet make wonderful if financially unrewarding contributions to society. I know others who claim to have illnesses they don't have (It is VERY easy to fool psychiatrists)then grossly distort the impact it has on their lives. flipping jackpot with a free three bedroom house and enough Child Tax Credits to buy copius amounts of cocaine. The really sad thing is that it is the former group I rather see rearing the next generation. This problem is profoundly difficult their are some very genuine cases who are getting what they deserve. I am free markets man myself so ultimately I advocate abolishing most benefits and use the money to REALLY support those who are Ill but want to work to do just that. Higher benefits should be reserved only for those very few extreme cases of Schizophrenia and Manic Depression where work is impossible. The heart of the problem is the absurd Disability Living Allowance. We (mental Health Professionals) use it to stop our clients who cannot work from living in abject poverty. But the benefit was intended to meet care needs, so when someone claims DLA we encourage them to exaggerate their condition so that they can claim they can show how much their 'care' costs. But in reality we all know this money is not being spent on CARE. DLA must be scrapped and people accessed for a new much higher Incapasity to work benefit which is genuinely a vigourously enforced. I am currently Unemployed I get £70 per week this is enough to keep me going until I find work but if I was seriously ill and had to live on this for the rest of my life it would be devastating. We need to get this right. We also need health professionals to start talking openly and hoonestly about the problem. Psychiatrists earn so much money £2-3k per week that I really think they feel a social obligation to give everyone the highest benefits regardless of severity of illness. The worst thing, the very worst thing is that I have known people to fake severe episodes to get a hospital admission to get more benefits This seriously wastes the time of professionals who could be better deployed helping the sick rather than the thespian. My lost job was as a mental health rights advisors when I raised these issues at a forum i began to fear for my life. It may seem I am being hard on those who 'play the system' I am not policy has allowed this to happen. People respond to financial incentive if the incentive to act mad is strong enougth people will run around the streets naked shouting out 'I am an orange'.

HERE IS THE TRUTH. I am your average hard working man, but under Labour I do not know why I bother. I worked overtime this month only for it to be taxed and taken away. Yet labour will pay for all these idle sods with NOTHING wrong with them to sit about all day doing nothing. Go into the local bookies anytime during the day, Mr Brown, and then explain to me why these people are on benefits and do nothing all day, yet there is nothing wrong with them. I even hear them laughing about getting away with and coming up with ideas to get more money, yes MY TAX MONEY. It seems that once they get on benefits they stay on it, no questions asked. Bills paid for, tax, THE LOT. Yet hard working people have to go to work, WORRY about paying bills and then to top it all off every April etc they have to worry about going to fill in tax forms. These idle buggers dont. SORT IT OUT. People brag about being on the state, they are supposed to have never trouble, yet they go into crowded public places, drinking, laughing and betting. WHAT A JOKE. You just keep taking my tax money to pay for it. WHAT A JOKE. And CRIME? You might aswell TELL THEM to commit crime. Bring back the death penalty, that will stop them. What do you do with them when you cacth them? Give them a couple years of easy life in prison? Life for a life I say. So, MR BROWN, you are trying for a better Britain, yet pay my tax money for people to do noting all day and are light on criminals. You work that one out and let us know.

Give it a rest, John. If you stopped feeling so sorry for yourself maybe you'd have time to feel sorry for someone else.

Mr Brown
First of all congradulations on a great achivment of becoming the next prime minister !
Now the nitty gritty you have mentioned on at least a couple of times that first time house buyers will be given help.
Well i am a family man with a wife who works part time a 6 month old girl and a 3 year old girl i work very hard in a large carbon factory doing on average 48hrs overtime on top of my 42 hrs per week and we are struggling with our morgage and credit card bills WHAT HELP WILL WE GET ? We did not get a help to start with or a council house given to us we have worked hard to get what we have with little help £40 a month in tax credits is little help.

Doing 15 - 18 hours a day are we?

He might be working seven days a week so doing about thirteen hours a day for seven days. One solution mentioned by New labour might appeal: put your children into day care and send your wife out to work. Better still convert to Mormonism or Islam and send your wives into paid employment.

I do believe I have got my own message deleted for offensiveness. This is getting silly.

Can't see any combinations (!) of letters that could offend, so far.

At the risk of offending the B.B.C. in 1937..... no, but seriously now, can we just remind ourselves that Tony Blair took over from Margaret Beckett as Leader of the Labour Party?

Guess who I voted for.

Looks like were going to have ANOTHER election.

The problem with elections is in the run up, politicians spend all there time pandering to the public and sniping at each other rather than the important job of actually RUNNING THE COUNTRY.

Given that with Gerrymandering only the 2 big parties have a chance of winning, and given that their policies are so similar, wouldn't it make sense to do away with elections all together, and simple pick a Cabinet split 50/50 from the Conservative Party and the Labour party.

Make the cabinet posts "life" posts, and make them hereditary.

Then they could cut out all the squabbling and back stabbing and get on with increasing the wealth of land speculators like we pay them to do.

What's the point of an election when the three main parties are all conservative?

My condolenses on your having shuffled off your mortal coil by the way.

"God gave the land to the people!" That was the slogan of David Lloyd George, Britain's first Labour Prime Minister.

I used to be a member of the Labour Party, in 1966. I filled in a coupon in the Sunday Citizen and sent it to Transport House.

Any chance of a job at Party head office (wherever that is these days) making up messages for this message board? It's good fun so far, unpaid.

David Lloyd George was Liberal, not Labour.

Lloyd George knew my father.
Father knew Lloyd George.

I have a small idea for consideration, which I will outline, but I do so confident, albeit sadly, that it is never likely to be read by anyone with the power to give it serious consideration, and that, even if it is worthless, it is unlikely ever to be evaluated on its merits.

But I will write it nonetheless. We take heart in calls from our leaders that they will listen to our words as well as our votes, and despite the fact that disappointment inevitably follows, we are still driven to contribute, even if we go unheard, in the vague hope that we do have something to offer and that it might just be noticed. I hope that Gordon's words are sincere, and that this might, in this communications age, really be the dawn of change.

One of Gordon's most successful policies - granting independence to the Bank of England - worked, in my opinion, because it was an acknowledgement of the value of handing over power, in a well structured manner, to those who could use it well. If we truly wish to engage communities, and allow people to influence society for the good, then they must be empowered to do so.

What I propose is that a token amount of local budgets be set aside whose use the community could decide on directly. It could be a one-off event to start with, and continued if it was a success. During a series of public meetings ideas could be discussed, and finally, on the same day throughout the country (a public holiday, in order to maximise awareness), local communities would decide how to spend their money. The amount could be decided locally or nationally, but it would have to be small enough not to damage local finances, yet large enough to attract people to get involved, and to have a tangible, positive effect.

Communities could decide to, for example, commission a piece of public art to commemorate a local event or hero, make a significant donation to a worthy cause and follow its fruits, invest in their futures, or even combine resources with other communities for larger projects.

Perhaps the idea could eventually be extended across Europe, with, for example, twinned cities joining forces in order to make a difference that could unite people of different backgrounds from very different places in a common achievement.

People are at their best when they have they are empowered to make positive changes, together, whose results they and their communities can take pride in. I believe this could be one way forward.

I agree with much of what you say, but based upon my own local authority's behaviour the last thing I would give them is a pot of public money! However, there is one way that it could be done. I would advocate that responsible local authorities be given a 'reward' to be paied into the Council Tax kitty. What would they be rewarded for? Well, that would be based upon topical / national issues, such as encouraging recycling; more use of public transport, decent leisure facilities, etc. And if the government paid the 'reward' with the instruction that it was to be used to reduce (the increase in) council tax, then it would be in the interest of all members of the community to support those issues.

Perhaps the wording on this site's front page should read "Britain's new Labour Prime Minister", rather than "Labour's new Prime Minister".

Gordon is everyone's Prime Minister after all, no matter what their political persuasion.

Should have read "Britain's Neo-conservative Prime Minister"... with the emphasis on the "con".

No, you couldn't make it up

Priminister Brown,

I have just watched you on BBC World News making your speech outside No.10 as Priminister. I am not a political character, although feel today I would like to say something.

You made your promises to the country. I wish for you to understand the word Community. This is a historic word that works & should be endorsed in this world today as it has been forgotten.

This is a fundamental reason that the ‘Future for Britain’ list became problems to tackle. There is not enough or no true support – support from all levels if communities. The ideals of modern youngsters & adults is 'self'. If you can promote a sense of complete 'community' instead - a sense of support within the family, the home, the community, the counties & the country - you will see results. I would ask you to consider this as a root to all the countries changes when making your path as such a powerful leader.

Good Luck with your new position.
May you use it wisely.

Natasha

Surely one of the biggest causes of the loss of community has been the need for 'mobility', where individuals have to move to areas where jobs exist, or out of areas where they are priced out by second-home owners and those who buy-to-let.

I spend a lot of time in Cornwall where the overwhelming disparity between house prices and wages which has grown over the past 20 years is destroying a whole way of life its no wonder they vote libdem

Please note: The internet/computer error on the word Speech, was not done intentionally by the person who wrote this. Natasha.

I have an idea for reducing the amount of people in prison and allowing the real criminals to remain locked up. Instead of locking up people who do not pay council tax (and making those of us who pay pay to keep them) send them out to work with the people that the money raised from council tax pays for. That should mean there is more room to keep the real criminals inside.

"Council tax"? The Tories invented those words for people who hated "the council" and wanted to privatise everything especially local services.

Maybe im going out on a limb here, but would a rather obvious solution not be to build more jails? The only other solution is rather drastic.... bring back capital punishment so we dont put murders in jail anymore and take up space. But thats obviously not an option we want to use. But look at all them money we have wasted on things like "the millenium dome" which could have gone elsewhere into building thousands of more cells.

Their is a direct correlation between social mobility and crime. Lowest social mobility (UK, USA) highest. Rest of Europe vice versa. Low mobility is an injustice done to the poorest, high mobility gives people hope and aspiration. Recent studies on social mobility in the UK are the biggest error of the Blair years. I would like to see a genuine policy that addresses this problem. Tuition fees at University are a disaster. Wealthy parents are already setting aside the money for their childrens university education. Poorer kids will face ever greater debts. The really sad bit is we are wating so much inert intelligence and talent. Research has shown that the expansion in universities has just meant more degrees for rich kids, even the least able middle income kids can now put some letters after their name. My schoolfriends were on average brighter than the folks I met at university but my appalling comprehensive in the east end of london meant they had no chance. I really believed this situation was getting better under labour, I knew progress would be slow but I did not think we would go backwards.

I cannot even begin to describe my absolute disgust with the Labour Party and I truly hope that it will soon cease to exist and be consigned to the dustbin of history where it belongs. I support the idea of having rights for non smokers and believe strongly that they have a right to not inhale other people’s smoke. However, the very notion of sending state employees to spy on others in England’s pubs, take photos, to harass and then to plan to harass honest, hardworking citizens that unfortunately smoke to pay fines for leaving a butt after being denied ANYWHERE to smoke is disgusting. This party does mot understand democracy, the British people or the concepts of tolerance and compromise and has its total disregard for the dignity of others makes it no longer a legitimate organisation fit to represent any one of us. We deserve better than you and I sincerely hope that your party dies as a political force for the good of this country.

I used to support Labour and see you as ‘my’ party. How deeply wrong I was.

One problem with your arguement that we live in a democracy! Its great having freedom of speach and the choice to do as we please. But with that comes reponsibility and respect for others. Yes smokers should have the right to smoke, and they do. They can still smoke at home or outside. But why should non-smokers be exposed to second-hand smoke? Non-smokers DONT have a choice but to endure it, while smokers have the choice to simply NOT smoke for a few hours until they go home. Just because someone cant get through 30 minutes without a puff on a cigarette doesnt mean I should have to inhail their fumes in the pub! I have no choice but to sit there and inhail it, but the smoker DOES have a choice to not smoke for a few hours! Its not a democracy when non-smokers are being forced to inhail second hand smoke and expose themselves to harmfull fumes! And why should I have to leave a pub or a club on a night time and wake up in the morning to have all my clothes stink of smoke either? I dont have a choice about that!!!!

Illegal war, satellite boxes to track us where ever we go, central DNA registers; all against the will of the people. What democracy? What consultation? Democracy is more than about crossing a box every five years, it is about compromise, tolerance and active participation and finding solutions that suit both sides and not about a politically correct nanny state sending diktats down to us from on high.

I agree to an extent. But you cant include smoking into this. Smoking effects the people around you. Its not just the smoker choosing to smoke, because the dozens of people around them have to endure it too. But we need to be observed to a degree to prevent crime. CCTV for example... myself and an ex-gf were jumped on last year and had there been a CCTV near the area, they would have caught them. But because its a small village we dont. Instead I had to stand up, after being punched and kicked to see my ex-gf in tears, crying, black and blue. And THEN know they wouldnt get caught.

I am sorry to hear that. It must be a very disturbing experience and I should imagine that it takes a while to get back to your normal self. I know it would me.

Your close build more jails and make them far less plesent. Remove all forms of currency like money, alcohol, mobiles, cigerettes, drugs. In fact remove the rights of prisoners to own *anything* except for a single A4 laminated sheet of photographs. Randomise there days, more them around all the time. Break up the internal hiarachy. Make prison less dangerous for petty criminals and less plesent for hard core criminals.

I know you were being sarcastic, but I dont really understand why criminals are giving any luxaries anyway! They lost any human rights they had when they mugged, raped, killed or stole! So why should they get nice comfy rooms, meals 24/7 or time out of their cells? We treat criminals better then we do the hard working citizen.

Tony Blair do you agree with an airdrop of a billion pieces of paper to every Iraqi city known detailing the true feelings of the people who care in Iraq? Many have of us been touched by words when we needed it most. From the arguements with mom to the letter to truley spell out how you feel to someone. Do you know how many lives can be saved in Iraq if these people get one of the best written and explanitory letters ever dreamed. It many not take one letter to be picked up, it may not take 5 but sooner or later they will read it and wish it was like that again. THEN, and only then will the true intentions come out. These letters would have to describe many suicide attacks which focus on the loss of life, not the fighting. It would have to focus on how they were brothers at once. One of these promises that the letter should entail is the U.S. will promise to leave if the people agree. The people will still keep to themselves, but just call a referendum for peace or war.Dont mess up like abbas did and threatened it with words but never carried it out, thus leaving the people helpless and without a voice.

At least they wont be short of firelighting material.

Does anyone see the irony in how we're tying to clean up the environment, but its ok to litter Iraq with thousands of flyers? Has this actually happened or is it being discussed? If it has, then what good will it do? What are these flyers going to contain? what could the british or US government possibly tell the Iraq people that they dont already realise?

PLease god can someone turn down the profanity filter! The letters P E E and B J should only be filtered when seperate from other letters maybe? else freedom of Spe ech and of the sub jects get ignored!

Freedom of speach? whats that? That seems a strange concept!

So when is our wonderfull, amazing government going to actually tackle Anti-social behaviour in a manor that isnt completely laughable? ASBOS and on the spot-fines are a joke! We have a government that loves to blame "deprived areas" for anti-social behavour so they have the excuse to "pump more money into the economy" instead of actually tackling the issue. They love to pain this image of anti-social youths all being from bad families, bad areas and bad educations so they can make the solution sound so much easier. Amazing how we never hear about the anti-social youths from the middle of upper-class families. Amazing how we never hear about the Oxbridge kids going out every night on benders, causing fights and urinating in the street. We only get to hear about the council estates and the lower class problems. It makes it so much easier for the government to say "they just need more money in their community *smiles*"! Its either that or "we should give them caring and understanding", so they can learn not to mug or knife people! Crime is a joke in this country and the government, full of middle-aged men and women have no idea about handling youth culture. They are so out of touch with the youth of this country, its pathetic. As if giving someone a piece of paper telling them not to wear a hoody is going to stop them mugging an old women!

the crime figures are a total joke, I work in drug treatment and the bullying, threats and intimidation to get 'targets,' are a laugh, the culture is mental with contracts being given out to 'friends,' figures massaged and actual output = negative, what a sham, a crime infact,
I joined the labour party when I was 17 and am proud of that...but not now, it's the corruption...in the area I know, Leeds and I guess across the country, pull your finger out Gordon!

Poor people don't commit crimes, desperate people do. People who have something are preyed on by people who have nothing - certainly nothing to lose. Our society is becoming more like America where the winner takes everything and the loser keeps nothing. No wonder social cohesion is breaking down when everybody is out for themselves irrespective of the feelings of others.

We rise and fall together, or not at all.

No one should be abandoned or left behind.

I can just about remember a time when people still respected their teachers, and parents and the police force. I think it was when I was about 14, which was ten years ago. And oh yes, just before the Labour party came into power! I sware that when I turned about 14 or 15, I started to notice more and more anti-social behaviour happening. Whether its a coincidence it happened just as labour party came into power, I dont know! You tell me! But I can distinctly remember more and more chavs showing up around that time and this culture of an attitude arrumpting and NO one stepping in to stop it before it spread. I can remember a friend first mentioning the word "charva" when I was 14 and I laugh at how it took 10 years to finally spread around the country and down south, and be turned into "chav" by the media. We had issues with chavs and anti-social behaviour up in Newcastle long before the media noticed it in 2000. Its been a long running issue that started around the same time the labour party turned up and took power. Atleast I believe so.

Thank God that there are others who see the same things as I do. New Labour have nurtured the chav/yob culture in this country and disrespect is the norm in so many schools. It seems that they pick and choose their causes and prefer to hammer upright, hard-working people who pay their taxes and dues rather than to tackle louts and parasites who bleed us dry as a society. There again, it's easy to hammer law-abiding people as they don't usually bite back. Not until now, at least . . . . .

pray tell mr brown, why a scotsman is leader of the labour party of an english government??? the mind boggles...

Because it's not an English government. It's a British government. The mind does not boggle.

I have to admit I didnt know much, if anything about Gordon Brown until recently. He was always some guy in the background that I had never seen or heard on TV. But then I saw an interview and I thought... "hang on, hes Scottish!!!" ...surely thats going to result in some bias towards making Scotland?

I think that Mr brown has more substance than that. He is from a strong southern Scots, lowland background and is brought up with very solid, moral principles. The very things that once forged the Labour Party into something great until it lost the way and became a facile, marketing scam. I hope that Mr Brown sticks to the values of his culture and brings back integrity, honesty and fairness to his party and Britain as a whole.

Ironically if scotish MPs couldn't vote on england only matters, Labour wouldn't have the majority needed to win them.

What can any Goverment offer me, I know of world wide issues and those closer to home but hey, what about me. I'v worked all my life, I have a mortgage, poll tax rates..... endless bill paying. I don't have children but have payed towards 3 children that are my partners through CSA even though her payed through the courts( he was not an absent parent) in the material sense, hence CSA not that they wanted to know about the emotional sense.I have some savings, not that I get a good rate, but If I did my mortgage would increase. I work in a job that has been put under soooo much presure through targets and If I wanted to leave it I could not as I would loose everything I worked for. So anyone out there who would you vote for.

Worryingly the only party with policies different to ConservoLabour is now the BNP, and no-one can vote for them without being branded a racist.

So your choice is: A life of slavery, or have all your friends call you a racist.

That's just ignorant & shows how little you have looked. The gulf is vast & getting wider. As to the BNP....well Nazi is not enough.

It is with considerable relief and pleasure that I hear the great news that Harriet Harman is elected Deputy Leader. Her position on sectarian (aka "faith")schools and interference in the political life of Britain by religious "leaders" is like a breath of fresh air. Hopefully the Cabinet reshuffle to come will oust Opus Dei and lead New Labour back towards Secular Democracy and Secular Education. If there is progress in this direction perhaps I may even be supporting New Labour again soon.

Nice to see Ms. Harman back, but one voice of sanity in the wilderness won't make much difference. As my landlady used to say: A nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat in a dark library.

It's just a pity she's decided to back track on her appology for Iraq.

I heard of U-Turns before, but never a U-Turn reversal of an apology!

Mr Brown mentioned citizen's juries & forums. Is he really thinking about Demarchy ??? ie true representation via fair lotteries like jury selection ?
He didn't commit to anything specific eg like the hopefully obvious solution to genuine reform of the House of Lords, but I hope to be very impressed if there is a real intention towards 'power to the people'.
I might even vote for a politician again.

Bertie Ahern says there will have to e a referendum in Ireland about the latest EU treaty. But's that's because of the Irish constitution. Some changes need a referendum.

You may contact me. I am not writing to the DATA CONTROLLER. Who would? He sounds like a Dalek. But of course, he's not. It's only the Labour Party, after all.

I seem to have invented a new cabinet post! Sorry for the thick fingers.Question still stands however.

When are Labour finally going to get around to addressing the Child Support Agency. As an "absent parent" (which in itself feels like a derogatory term to responsible dads like me) I pay the CSA around 30% of my take home pay. I've been doing this for around 10 years now. However the new system (introduced many years ago) says that for 1 child I should only pay 15%, and that this should be reduced to 12.5% if I have a different dependent child living with me (which I do). So I'm paying three times what I should be.

Why? Because when the new system was introduced, the decision was made to keep existing cases on the old system until the computer system was ready for them to be moved across. I've written to my MP and had numerous replies from Baroness Hollis on this matter, defending the CSA and saying that my payments will be moved to the new system when the computer system works properly.

So for 10 years I've paid a couple of hundred pounds a month more than I should have because the government can't get a computer company to get a job done. Yet these payments are supported by law because the "old system" is still legally supported for old cases like me waiting to be transferred across.

When I heard the news this year that the CSA will finally be addressed I cheered... until I then heard that the changes may take up to 5 years to implement. Great - just in time for my daughter's 18th birthday.

Me paying more than I should doesn't help anyone - my ex wife doesn't work so any extra money from me just offsets her benefits. So my ex wife and daughter aren't any better off, my new family is worse off, and there are many many other dads in my situation out there.

I find it disgraceful that Labour has allowed a body such as the CSA, fraught with injustices on both sides of the parental equation, to continue spreading misery to families.

Ah, it seems that the CSA is doing what it was intended to do: reduce government expenditure. It seems to me that it does little else and causes hardship all over the show, so it should be scrapped. Can you suggest anything we who are not directly involved can do to help (sign petitions, write to our own MPs, etc?)
Although it wasnt this gov't that introduced the CSA, this is one of the things I had expected a Labour government to put right, like the dental service, equal education for the poor, etc.

The missing letters spelt a word that the web-software has misidentified as offensive. I do hope the programmers may fix this soon. Look at Martin's post below! It defines a member of the House of Lords as offensive!

The profanity filter is a little overzealous!

I don't fucking know what you bastard well mean!

Sorry, to avoid misunderstanding, I'd better point out that I meant the web software, not Martin's post, defines a member of the House of Lords as offensive!

WShould the future of Britain include maintaining as a peer of the realm (Lord Ahmed of Rotherham) someone who compares a great author with a mass murderer? And should that same peer have his membership of the Labour Party stripped?

Which of the candidates will stand up for freedom of speech as it is attacked by the religious bigots who seek to censor all views different from their own?

Gordon Brown has the resolve, the courage, and the steadfastness to take on the tough challenges, ask the hard questions, and guide Britian through an uncertain future. Those who attack him are underestimating his capabilities. They want Britian to hide from the problems of the world. GB realizes that our security and our prosperity depend on new policies and new ideas, not the same old conservative injustice dressed up with sunny rhetoric.

Gordon Brown has just receive half a million pounds cash from a team of 4 private-equity managers. Think Private-Equity funds are going to get taxed now?

If GB cracks down on anti-social behaviour and actually starts locking up thugs and yobs. If he starts giving people sentences they deserve, rather then patheticly short sentences for knife crime and GBH, then Im happy. But if all we get are more excuses about "Anti-social behaviour is the result of poverty" I'm going to give up completely on another utterly useless PM.

Agreed again! I'd offer you one of my roll ups with pure tobacco from Eastern Europe, but you'd probably politely decline. In any case, I agree with you a lot more than I thought I would.

Brown is an instant turn off. He needs to brighten up.

Can I write something now? Oh, great!

I think Gordon and Hattie deserve our support, and if it were possible I would attach a helpful idea on the subject of campaign songs. Sadly, it doesn't seem possible on this carefully-managed website.

I voted Irish Labour last month, but unfortunately we lost. The party that had Bill Clinton and.......... appearing in a party political broadcast won, but never mind.
Fraternally,
Jon

It doesn't matter much who we get as deputy leader. The ruling clique have ensured they have the leader they want and the deputy is largely irrelevant. In any case, the government's options are limited. The real power is in the hands of the press barons.

No, the press barons don't have power. Maybe a part in capitalist "hegemony" (Gramsci?).

Maybe Labour should take power and stop giving bits of it away

Hold on, the press barons have the power to print more or less what they like and swing the opinion of their numerous readers, most of whom can't be too bright, else they wouldn't buy the rags.

Both the "Press Barons" and the Labour party are effectly "owned" by what people know as "The Establishment". Want to know who the establishment is? Poke your head around the door into the house of lords. The Press, and both the big polotical parties are wholely owned subsidiaries of the big land owners. This is why taxes are leveraged onto the poor... the people less able to pay while the people owning half the country and collecting tens of millions in rent aren't taxed at all.

What is wrong with you people? Get real.

Immigrants are a necessary (& welcome - apart from you xenophobes) cornerstone of our society: economically, socially and in many other ways.

Send 5 million of them home and watch our country sink, fools.

I agree its good to have immigrants in your society to widen our perspective of the world, and to inrich our culture and improve the economy. But I have to agree with those who say the immigration rules are far too lax. I dont mind people coming here because they want to work and support themselves, and I understand that some people come here to escape pain and suffering. But I think we need to be harsher on who we let in, because we have alot of immigrants in the UK who just dont need to be here or deserve to be here.

Th immigrants are mere victims of Gordon Brown's insane attempts to do anything it takes to hold inflation down. These people work for less then minimum wage and live in appalling conditions. Their low wages hold inflation down but they have finally had enough and are leaving in droves.

They came here because the pay is so good, and are leaving again because they've found out that on their wages they can only afford to timeshare a cardboard box or sleep 20 to a house with one bathroom.

I couldn't agree more! The vast majority of immigrants are polite, law-abiding ane they aren't afraid of hard work.
Nothing sickens me more than hearing that the government I voted for are blocking immigration or even at times deporting people to countries where they may be threatened, imprisoned, tortured or killed, all just to appease the gutter press.

So you would just open the flood gates and let everyone in to this already overcrowded island where we are no longer able to house the peopel that are already here? Most of the new immigrants are not from poverty stiken places and are just here to make bucks. The really poor ones cannot afford the costs of getting her even.

But are you also going to deny that a small % of these immigrants ARE committing crimes? It wasnt that long ago, that we had a spate of rapes and murders being commited by immigrants driving around in cars in London! You cant just allow anyone and everyone into this country who wishes to enter. You have to have control and scrutination. We already have 1000s of illegal immagrants walking the UK who we have no way of tracking. Its great if they come here to work and learn our language and earn their keep. But not ALL of them are legit and alot purely want to come here to scrounge of us and commit crimes.

Really looking forward to Sat and building towards Labour's next election victory!!!

They'de better hurry up and call the elction quick. By christmas the economy will have crashed and the house prices will be divnig. Best to call it now before people realise how totally screwed they are.

Good for you!
I know I should not ask this, but has anybody counted up how many presbyterian Prime Ministers Britain has had?
(not counting Ramsay Mac)
Only slaggin!
Jon

I meant to say:
"Only slaeggin'"! The BBC tv programmes we get on cable in this State are from the North (of Ireland). That includes political discussion, satire and comedy.

Get serious, Gord! Wales, Scotland and the 6 Counties each need their own "Secretary of State for..." with someone in the Cabinet to speak up for all.
But seriously.

Good luck, Hattie and Gord.
At last, a Labour government again.

And well done Margaret as "Rank Labour" Leader and Deputy when it mattered a great deal.
Fraternally,
Jon

If things are so good why has homlessness doubled under New Labour and social house building declined to its lowest level since records began?

It's going to get a lot worse. With the recent and forthcoming interest rate rises, in the next 18 months you can expect to see 1-2 million people lose their homes.

We will end up with poor-houses again, with large dorms with lines of bunkbeds, and huge soup kitchens providing basic food.

We have huge debts and no way to pay them. Eventually people are going to be asked to pay the money back, and when they can't, they can expect no mercy.

Time to start Squatting methinks: www,squatnow,com

One thing is for sure, poverty will widen and increase if the government is unstable. Brown's coming appointment is encountering widespread bad press. If Brown cannot get Labour together and establish himself as a true and natural leader, the entire population, including the poor will suffer. That is what happened when Major inherited the role of PM. Only a strong leader can avert the prospect of a weak economy.

One thing that seriously worries me is the welfare menatality which has gripped whole communities UK wide. I think New Labour must tackle this head on by selling off council housing (to tenants and 1st time buyers)(except in the case of the elderly and SEVERLY DISABLED.

Oh my god noooo.... sSelling the social housing is the WORST thing you can do! All you do is line the pockets of private landlords! You make the rich richer and the poor poorer!

Council houses aren't WELFARE houses, they are affordable housing for the masses who don't earn enough to pay £200,000 for a 1 bedroom flat? Think they should get a better job? Tell that to the nurses, firemen and the man who empties your bins!

I'd be very interested in knowing where people on low wages will live when all social housing has been sold off. I work for a charity and get asked this question all the time by men, women and familites too poor to even rent a home in the private sector let alone mortgage a property. Please tell me where to tell them to go and what they are supposed to do.

With most of the social housing now sold, they are expected to pay vast sums to private landlord to live in shoeboxes. This situation gets worse with every council house sold. The only solution is "Social Squatting". Social Squatting involves normal people moving into empty rundown houses, tidying them up and living in them. (ANTISocial squatting is where a group of smelly hippies move into a nice house and wreck it...) Squatting will soon be common, and wont carry the stigma it used to! www,squatnow,com

We are moving forward, we are impproving, and we are moving the extremes closer to the the middle ground of politics. Gordan Brown and Tony Blair have led us like no other Labour team before in terms of political succes and economic growth for our nation. I would like to see Britain becomimg the training ground for modern society. Using its wealth of talent and creativity to help other poorer nations to raise the growth in ther economies and their peoples living standards so they can look to compete and join in with all of us on level terms. We also need to learn to use Egovernment a Ebusiness technonolgy better to do away with the forrest of trees we destroy whilst communicating. To speed up contact between nations and their peoples and to open ways the worlds peoples can talk to each other almost instantly. Finally, following the training path is wealth creation if you add value and sell it others, and far better than working down a pit and inhaling coal dust and dying young.

Yes, but coal mines were being made safer until Thatcher shut them all down because she hated the miners. And wrecked the railways because she hated railway workers.

And there was and is clean coal technology.

no, she closed the coal mines to cripple the unions and force the lower classes into abject poverty.

She wrecked the railways in order to hand a vital national asset over to a few of her rich campaign contributors, who then got the money they paid for it back in a tax cut anyway.

A bit like Blair did with Air Traffic Control, leaving us with the only privately owned Air Traffic Control system in the world. (No other country risks privatising it!)

Before you go lecturing people about who's English; you should maybe learn how to spell in English. Try reading a book or learning something.
The immigrants are here to work and to pay taxes; they wouldn't be here if the Maths didn't add up. These peolpe work in my local Laundry Factory and are my local Dentist (who work with my Girlfriend; she's a Nurse). They earn and pay a lot of Tax.
Blame me and my girlfriend for not having babies. If I had kids then they would be out there working and paying the taxes. Blame my parents who I'm hoping are going to live to a ripe old age and keep drawing the Pension.
I guess the other way, would be for the English?? to all pay 50-60% Tax; then we could live as we used to 20 years ago.
The Bills need to be paid!!
Cheers Jerome

There is growing resentment in England that the Scots get free care for their old people, grants for university education. The Welsh get free percriptions which are expensive in England. We all pay the same taxes. Gordon Brown as a Scot has the chance to put these discrepancies right before this resntment gets very much worse

These "discrepencies" exists because of the way the constituencies are planned out, the power of a vote in Scotland and Wales is much stronger than in England. By keeping the people in Scotland and Wales voting Labour they can keep themselves in power. Because of the low population vs Constituency densisty in Scotland and Wales, it is cheaper for the government to buy votes there than in England.

Simon you need to take a course in buisnnes or economics or something. Their is no trade, butcher, baker or candle stick maker who does not profit from an increase in population. Immigaration creates jobs and i good for the economy if managed correctly.

This only applies if you take all the land from the big Landlords before hand, else more people just results in house prices spiralling out of control.

You have to start somewhere, and sooner or later Scotland and Wales will have to pay for these themselves. Of course, Scots Nationalists have always argued that England benefited from their oil revenues. As time passes, so we'll sort the swings and roundabouts.

The only way to stop the unfairness caused by the piecemeal devolutions of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales is to create a federal system where decisions are made at the appropriate level of government. Have any of the United States of America tried for independance? Many other countries also have federal systems in place and Blair and Bush are trying to impose this system on Iraq. Say no more.

I agree. It's amazing how few people see this as the sensible solution.

On behalf of women I feel Labour is not doing enough to improve the living standards of our families. The mininimum wage is only £5.05 and it is mostly women who work at this level. I personally clean houses for a residential contractor and although my employer is fair, he and businessman like him are put under no government pressure to pay me or my coworkers a living wage. All we ask is for a little more, nothing that would hurt our business and nothing that we do not already deserve.

I do feel for you. On the other hand, do you think we would have any minimum wage were it not for Labour?
The government will say they are on the horns of a dilemma here, as in many issues: they may want to do more for the less well off, but, if they do, the money will eventually have to be raised either out of cuts elsewhere or from increased taxation, which could put the Tories back in.
On the other hand, if they hadn't spent so many billions on an illegal and, as was predicted and as it has turned out, both cruel and unproductive attack on Iraq, they could have put this money to better use!

More of the same. Labour have really given us a great foundation for the future; stable economy and high employment.

It was just someone I once knew whose name began with M. I think. It might have been N.

This is not funny any more, is it? And itneverwas, of course. Robin Cook was the funniest on the correct kind of sort of Left, I always thought.


There are no Stalinists since the days of Stalin, and in 1953 Tensing and Hilary climbed Chomolongma/Everest.

How nice that we've got the good old Labour Party back again.

In a pig's eye

The last decade has seen progress for the vast majority not the privileged few. Yes there are housing problems, yes terror has become a constant threat, but I feel better knowing Labour will be in charge. The Tories claim that they will "bring the power back to the people." But the citizens of GB are not stupid let alone gullible. They will not be fooled especially by someone like Cameron.

Actually under Labour the gap between rich and poor has widened to more than it has ever been. The top 1% have got about 100 times richer in fact, whilst most of the country is crippled with unmanagable debt.

That is the point. What Labour have won for us, they won't take that away. Because it's us wot won it.

I know ive already mentioned this, and I apologise. But I've been checking this website regulary for the past week as I sat at work. I can think of atleast 3 threads that have mysteriously vanished only a day or two after being made. All while newer and older posts still exist! These were non-offensive posts! Anyone else curious?

Well, that must have been loads of fun! But don't you see, everything has changed now?

Yours sincerely,
Mr X
Kronshtat
(not)

Im glad someone else notices this sort of thing.

I emailed the administration for the website, and its because your average Jow Blog is (or was) able to flag a post as abusive and it would simply vanish from the screen.

Which is acceptable and it should work that way. But instead of someone actually checking that flagged entry, they are (or were) going unchecked and just sitting there somewhere.

The result being that any old person can come along, flag a post as abusive (regardless of whether it is or not) and it never comes back.

It may have changed now, but I havent checked.

With just a short time until Gordon Brown becomes Prime Minister, I feel that Britain is moving in the right direction and has great promise for improvement. Brown understands the new challenges that our Country faces, including improving foreign relations and becoming more competitive in the global economy. His ideas are progressive and will bring about new opportunities for Britain.

I'll have 2 of whatever she's taking.

It's ok. Don't worry. Why am I saying this?

I live in a city centre and it is very safe. But we had a survey through the door recently with questions like 'Are you nervous on your own at night', 'Do you worry about having to go out at night' so no doubt the results showed that most people are anxious. I cannot understand how people can be so out of touch that they can talk about police states. When was the last time anyone on this site was imprisoned without trial?

Since when was anti-social behaviour a civil liberty? Are you suggesting we have a right be anti-social and the government has no right to stop us? And banning smoking in pubs and restaurants is one the best things to happen in years. You can't complain, because YOU still have the choice to smoke outside, or at home. Non-smokers had no choice but to endure second hand smoke!!! Now we do! And exactly what restrictions are inplace to prevent anti-social behaviour anyway? Asbos and on the spot fines!!! This country has no idea about how to handle criminals and anti-social youths. We dont lock people up anymore, we just give them bits of paper telling them off!!! I do however agree that locking someone up with trial is completely wrong!

well said Si!! one thing, I imagine you mean without trial! lets hope so :o)

Oh and this is the 3rd time I have had to create a new account to post on here! Do you not like me?

We may not have the best deal at the moment but what other choices do we have? The Conservatives? ok lower taxes possibly but no NHS,definate increase in privatisation and an even more separations in society.The Lib dems? well they need to be viable choice as a political party and that isn't likely as they stand, they are idealists but not realists.We all lead busy lives but we need to get in deep and each do our bit to make changes and actually if you shout and stamp your feet enough it is possible!The face of British politics at the moment isn't at its best where ever you look.This is opportunity for regeneration and to restore that excitment we felt in 1997.

Moving forward in the name of diversity, progress, and unity will legacy of this labour government. It hasn't all been perfect, but they are really beginning to listen and most importantly learn. Gordon is a new leader with a new attitude, one particularly fitted for the 21st century. See his Fabian society speech to see what I mean.

I quite agree with Jerome. Things have moved forward in the country over the last 10 years. Yes, not everything is prefect, but when has it ever? The important thing is what is next.

Gordon Brown is next! According to the media, he will be worst PM ever, and he will drive Labour into a bitter Opposition.

Labour needs to prevent the housing bubble from bursting. Real estate speculators are overheating our entire economy. We need affordable housing not arbitrage. Gordon Brown should address the council situation immediately upon taking office. Our communities depend on it.

He's spent the last 10 years ramping up house prices. The last thing he want's is for the bubble to burst. But it's out of his hands now. Credit will dry up, prices will drop, negative equity will arrive, repossesions will run away and millions, possibly tens of millions will be forced onto the streets. We will be faced with millions of homeless people and millions of empty houses. The british will be thrown out of britain as it is repossessed.

sebastian, you really are nicely on message. How is it that you support an unelected coward like brown? This man has contempt for democracy - he will include unelected businessman amongst his staff - he has no guts to either have a genenral election or a referendum on the murderer blairs disgusting sell out to the likes of siemens, unilever etc..? Get a job sebastian and pull your head out of the ususal place you put it.

The Labour government planned this whole charade, by setting low interest rates.

They have admitted to supressing interest rates to cause a credit boom, using the credit boom to fund spending to stave off a recession. The recession is still coming, it's just had an extra 5 years to build up steam.

Without doubt the biggest economic issue facing Britain is the needless boom in house prices, and the inevitable crash and recession that will follow.

Debt based money creation by the banks always leads to boom and bust and wealth transfer to the super rich at everyone elses expense. In the longer term monetary reform is needed, with a return to a gold standard, with money created by the state for the public good, not banks for private gain.

In the short term credit controls should be introduced on mortgages at 3.5 times income, and measures taken to prevent people lying on self cert applications. Hedge funds should also face proper regulation before a few crash and drag down the economy with them.

We should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan at the earliest opportunity, prevent the US from using rendition of terror suspects, and start behaving like a proper democratic state, and not like a banana republic. Our troops have been badly let down and deserve an apology for the lack of proper equipment, and being asked to fight a proxy war for greedy right wing extremists in the US.

Oh and by the way, when I voted Labour in 1997 I wanted a Labour Government. I'm still waiting for it. What I got was a branch of the US NeoCon Republican party, complete with corporate corruption, naive and dangerous foreign policy, and spin.

Can we please have the Labour party back, acting in our nations interest and not that of some deluded new world order clap trap. When that happens you might find you get your membership back and have the funds to fight the next election ! Alternatively you can continue with your heads in the corporate trough until you look up and find there are no voters behind you.

Gold Standards do not work very well in
a global market. The last gold standard
The Bretton Woods Agreement was abandoned
in 1971 largely because of the increased level of international trade and banking, countries simply opted out when it suited them. The reason being that all of the worlds assets are worth much more than all of the worlds gold.
Credit controls on mortages and credit cards are another 20th century policy that simply cannot work in the modern global economy. Because if you were stopped from borrowing from a regulated UK bank you would simply borrow from an international bank.
Hedge funds and private equity are also unstoppable because they operate accross borders.

The best we can do is try to comprehend the completely uncharted waters we are now in....even economists have not even began to grasp the 21st Century global economy. I agree entirely that we need some monetary reform but how?? If or should I say when we enter a major global crisis we might be able to achieve international consensus on where we went wrong and how to avoid it in the future.
I suspect an International Currency with International interest rates are where we are heading - the nice thing being it would entail a true international democracy and the death of the nation state.

There is NO SHORTAGE of houses. There are millions stood empty, it's just they are all owned by greedy BTL loonies.

If we can get rid of BTL normal people will be able to buy houses again.

Start by applying 300% council tax to all these empty properties to force the owners to either rent them out cheap or sell them to someone who can make better use of them.

In the meantime, all the people struggling to find somwwhere to live should just find an empty BTL property a squat. www.squatnow.com

Agriculture land has to be used for enough houses to be built. If Local Councils could be allowed to plan their area and purchase land at a fair price (Say 5 times agricultural rate) then the Councils would be able to either instruct developers of their needs in housing demand for market or Council owned. This would then provide affordable houses subsdised by the Council and recovered over years of ownership or rent.

The concept is great, the problem is that any agricultural land on the edge of town suitable for housing is owned by land speculators. Since they effectively OWN the government, there is little chance the government will take it off them for anything less that full market value, plus a little extra.

Besides, we have plenty of houses. They are all stood empty in the hands of BTL loonies who thing they can become millionaire by doing nothing apart from making people homeless.

They have become millionaires rags to riches and back to rags again. I wonder if all these irresponsible media types who have hyped up this market will be hitting us with hardluck documentaries. I have read somewhere bankers and financial advisors are scared they might get sued. As per usual it is the late investors that will be hit, theres a sheep like mentally with investors.

There is no need to use agricultural land for housing, this has to be kept and used more efficiently if we want to produce food and depend less on imported food. Also with bio fuels coming we will need this land. There are acres of unused brown field sites in every town and city. Why do we need so many houses? OK there are many immigrants but people are also emmigrating, we must realise that many more people have second homes now. Building on agricultural land means workers have to travel further to work this shouldn't be encouraged

We do not depend on imported food, like most of Europe we are food exporters - worse than that (thanks to the EU)we subsidise food and damage less developed economies. Biofuels are a complete waste of time the soil degradation they cause is hardly any better for the planet than fossils - personally i advocate nuclear. I do agree brown field sites should be developed first but in some areas (Such as Epping where I live they simply do not exist. Children born in this area often find it hard to stay in this area.
My humble ex council house is valued at £340k which is obscene. Just one field of bloody rape seed might mean my friends as they start families might be able to stay here.

Gordon Brown famously said that your government would not let house price inflation get out of control when Labour came into power, but appears to have gone back on this promise. In fact he appears to have based the whole economy on rampant house price inflation - making people believe that they are richer because their house is worth more, when in reality we as a nation are more in debt than we have ever been.

All this has been achieved at the cost of my generation who are taking on huge debts to prop up totally unsustainable house prices.

You have effectively denied a whole generation a stake in society.

It is my firm belief that this policy will have dire social and economic consequences if it continues.

Why has your government not moved to keep a lid on prices?

I have to disagree with S. There is an issue with affordable house and the government is doing something about it. But, if it wasn't the low interest rates we have and the low levels of employment no one would be able to buy a house.

The problem with interest rates is that you cannot guarnatee they will be low for long periods - people have stretched themselves without considering the implications of interst rates doubling.
I still think the problem is not interest rates but misguided speculation. It is amazing how many people think that 'bricks and mortar' are the the safest form of investment. In the long term stocks and shares are the best investment and always have been.

Absolute rubbish. Low interest rates increase the amount of money people can offer for a house, so the prices just go up to absorbe the available money.

In this case low interest rates were kept low to stoke public spending, which drove retail and prevented a recession. Of course all that done is make the recession deeper as the debt are higher.

The result of all this will be a recession, a depression, followed by Riots and end of british society as we know it.

The government has done something about affordable housing... it's sold it. The sale of the council houses removed most of the affordable housing and since then the government has done everything it can to prevent affordable housing, even going as far as to offer tax breaks for BTL landlords to ensure any affordable houses that do come onto the market go straight into the private rental sector.

Gordon Brown your miracle economy is a sham - you are spending this country into a oblivion!! You have failed the youth of our society on every level.

The quicker Labour gets ousted from power the better.

And the quicker the people with the most money get the chance to make more money, the better. That's what you mean, isn't it?

"Gordon Brown's Miracle Economy" -Lol!!

The UK is losing manufacturing jobs hand over fist. Since 1996, the fastest growing job in the UK is hairdressing!

"Low unemployment" - another joke. What the government defines as unemployed has been reclassified so many times these figures are now meaningless.

Our recent miracle economy is based on the britsh people being encouraged to borrow ever larger amounts of money to buy stuff they don't need from China. Why do think interest rates are so historically low?

To tackle inflation, the government has an open policy on immigration to keep wages low - whilst house prices triple!

Labour won't be happy until the UK is all "part 'an parcel" of the New World Order: One Goverment, One Currency and No Civil Liberties.

(NOTE: I have had to recreate my account again because this website is rubbish and it lost my previous username and password!)

Anyway John I think we're thinking along the same lines. My point (which I may have failed to make) is that parents, teachers and even the police are no longer able to actually dispolin young teenagers or adults. You run the risk of being arrested for slapping your child and teachers can no longer shout at a disruptive pupil. The rights of the criminals are now more important then the rights of the community. My personal belief are the same as yours. I wish communities would work together to sort these issues out, but as I've said people are scared to stand up against anyone because your more likely to get arrested yourself or attacked. I pesonally had a situation where a young teenager was shouting abuse at me every night after work for 2 weeks while I walked through my street! I gave him 2 weeks to get bored and pack it in, but 2 weeks later and he was still doing it. I finally snapped and shouted for him to pack it in or I'd remove his head! Has he said anything since, or even showed his face in the street anymore? Nope! Im only 24 myself, so im hardly old. But even I think we need to be more firm with kids and young adults! Anti-social behaviour wont be sorted out by Asbos or on the spot fines. We need to get tough and put them in their place. No one dispolins anyone anymore and they run a muck!

I pay income Tax, Council tax, and also I pay rent-tax. This is the tax I pay to my landlord for the right to live. If I stop paying my landlord I get thrown on the street, and put in prison for vagrancy.

Land is a unique finite resource which is now wholey owned. Everyone needs access to it to live, and as a result, the people that own it get a free ride. They bought it when it was cheap, and everyone who comes after is enslaven to them for the rest of their lives.

I met a chap who bought a 30 acre farm for
£1m. Less than the cost of a large apartment in Chelsea. If he were allowed to build on that land he could sell you a plot for £10000 for you to construct a house upon. He would still make an enourmous profit. You would have a decent house for say £60,000 after construction costs. Who loses????

I'll tell you small minded house owners.
Why do you think we have such tight regulation, why do you think we have local councils constantly trying to fight housing devleopment. Because conservatives (with a small c) are terrified of house prices in their areas falling.

And what about house prices?!? House prices have tripled over the last 10 years? When will this government start to tackle the real issues: inflation, low interest rates, irresponsible lending, tax breaks for But To Letters?

Labour is helping to print money like it is going out of fashion.

Don't worry, the pound will be going out of fashion sooner than you think.

There is more to poverty than cash, more to getting out of poverty than formal education. To date, our policies have not addressed children's right to choose futures through their own creativity. We provide play opportunities only in childcare. We are even doing away with playtime at school in many instances. We should remember the old adage. Be nice to your children. They choose your care home.

How true. I was really heartbroken and shocked when
I read that children in Britain are the
unhappiest in Europe. They 'have' more
but children are not materialists they know the best things in life are free. Stressed out parents with no time for their children is a savage poverty indeed. I am pleased to say many of my friends have put children before money, but then we are all defined as 'seriously mentally ill'

Children will always live in poverty as long as the unfair tax system taxes the working people rather than the mega-rich landlords. You pay income tax, council tax and renttax. Renttax is the tax you pay to your landlord for the right to live. Landlords just collect renttax and pay none of the others.

With a change of administration, how about considering a more public-friendly approach to being environmentally-friendly? Since the cranking up of demands upon households (who do not manufacture paper, plastic and other waste materials at home), and introduction of a rainbow of collection sacks on different days, our towns are littered with sacks or bins waiting to be collected on most evenings of the week, and garages and gardens are constantly spoiled by accumulating bags for collection, and unwanted, paper and plastic packaging. Environmentally-friendly has become environmentally ugly. Now it seems that we could be fined for putting the wrong type of plasic into bags, or for taking what we do not want cluttering our homes to the Council dump.
Further, if we work, but can only get jobs away from our home area, the penalties for being committed enough to make a contribution are to be further increased.

Rethink time, if you do not want responsible people to be just a little tempted to fly-tip or go on the dole. Instead of Councils increasing driven to police the public they serve, how about positive targets to help us work together:-
1.Introduce incentives to householders who do recycle and make it easier for us - make all the collections weekly, until industry and junk mail distributors have been brought into line.
2.Make sure that binmen have the time allowance to collect refuse and recycling materials from side/back yards rather than littering our streets.
2.Introduce performance targets and rewards to organisations to reduce unnecessary packaging materials or those that are not the right kind of plastic, and to meet recuitment and procurement targets from people living within their boundaries. Make this a feature of their star ratings for the future.
Then we might begin to live once more in an era where more of the public willingly help, rather than feel brow-beaten into compliance to an unwelcome power elite.

2.Make sure that binmen have the time allowance to collect refuse and recycling materials from side/back yards rather than littering our streets.

This is such a good idea. Cost a few pennies on council tax Vs. benefit an attractive environment. Analasys Phillipa 1 Government 0. Fight

Hi,
Just saying that you may be looking beyond the responsibilties of the general public. An old word such as Community comes to mind. People have been scared off chastising or correcting people for low level crime and disorder by the right wing Press. The Thatcher and Blair years have bread a society that looks teaches us to look away rather than engaging with eachother. The Individual is King. In years gone by, people would have a general set of standards and keep eachother in check. This is the basis of Community. Longer sentences or more Police is the wrong answer; it's up to us to make things better; the Police can only do so much.
My Dad tells me stories of what he did as a child and how dangerous it could be but people intervened if necessary; I think we are living in a time of parenoidal calm; stirred up by the press and powers that be, because it sounds good. The sooner John Reid and the Daily Mail are gone the better.
As they say "Try not to look at what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."
Cheers Jerome

Your quite right. There is still so much that needs to be done especially around social housing. But it is very easy for people to forget what the 80s and early 90s were like under the Tories. 3 million unemployed, 15% interest rate. Things are better now.

I understand that Ruth Kelly described anyone against the HIPS and and Energy performance certificates as being "anti green"
Well what about all the energy and paper being used in printing these 60 page booklets just to sell your house. Not to mention these inspectors driving around in cars.
On another subject what about all the energy being used in this "Air tightness test" that new houses are subject to. Firstly it sounds very unhealthy and secondly it is contradicted by building regulations which state that windows must have trickle vents and kitchens and bathrooms must have mechanical vents (i.e electrical extractors) and for obvious safety reasons there must be a permanent open vent where there is a boiler. So why waste energy with inspectors temporaraly blocking up all these vents and pumping air into a house. If the government wants to really help the environment then it ought to stop introducing stupid paper and energy wasting red tape and schemes

I would just like to make a comment about the Energy Performance Certificates.Its a little like the story of the King with no clothes. Everyone was afraid to mention that he had no clothes on for fear of embarasing themselves.How wil this scheme save the planet.It is a ridiculous idea from the government, insulting our intelligence.If the government want to save the enviroment then stop this silly scheme and come up with ideas that will look good to the people of Britain.One idea could be to enforce the building of smaller engines in cars, there is no need to race at 200 mph on our roads.

Is anyone else angry about how the Labour Party have destroyed many of our civil liberties? ID cards, talking CCTV, Facial Recognition technology, Licence Plate reading technology, end of trial by jury in some cases, extensive interviews for a passport, and many, many others, are harming Britain and set terrible examples for the world. Please Gordon: END THE MADNESS and save our democracy

The removal of civil liberties is a necessary evil in order to prevent the population grouping together and overthrowing the establishment which has run this county under the guide of conservolabour for the last 20 years.

Yes. I think that the identity card scheme is a nightmare. I don't mind having a card with photo and basic details - dob and address - but am completely against one with a chip which stores all this extra data. I don't know why I'm filling this in as it will all get filed away and stored up against my name for future use sometime. But I shouldn't let that stop me having my voice!

Alan Johnson's comments regarding Margaret Hodges' remarks are typical from a government that has spent too long in power. The government exists to serve the people of Britain not all of mankind. Johnson is a stupid man who has a guilt complex from empire days and feels that he must offer the world free housing, education and healthcare to atone. Treasury money does not belong to the government but to the indigenous people ie the taxpayers; he would do well to remember this.

The hunting ban is irrelevant. It was watered down to nothingness by Tony to please his pro-hunting party funders.

It's scope is so narrow it hardly covers anything and it has no real teeth.

The only reason the lords blocked it was because if they didn't people would have cottoned on to the fact it was drivel.

I couldn't agree more. Hunting should stay a crime.

i would like to bring to every ones attention the matter about C.S.A. not every single mother (or farther) out here is a bad person or someone who wants to claim benefit because they can!!

i am a single mun and i am getting increasingly anxious about the amount of weeks, months and even getting into years how long it is taking the CSA to sort out payments, i have enquired and as of yet i have had no joy i feel that this is being over looked by the goverment as someting that is not a priority and there are other things that are important, i feel let down by this service and by the goverments attitude and i think that it needs to be looked at in close detail to get it sorted, why should i struggle when others are being let off with thier duties!! i am appalled and extreemy dissapointed as i think labour have done a lot to encourage people back to work!!maybe this wont make any diffrence but it needs to be said!!

I think restorative justice should be used more. Getting people to clean up the mess they have created has to be a good idea.

Not only will it help put things right but I believe it will help discourage people in the first place.

No one in the UK would disagree.

Start by making Blir clean up his mess in Iraq.

I read this morning on national news sites that government ministers are pushing through a bill to allow local authorities to charge road users for using roads. This is disgusting. Firstly, what on earth is road tax for, and as if I don't pay enough for it, secondly we're taxed to death on petrol and thirdly I live in London and the 'congestion zone' made no difference what so ever. All the congestion zone did was force people out of driving through price, not 'encourage them to use public transport'.

I have always had faith in the Labour government and what it stood for, even through the Iraq saga, but to be honest with you, you're starting to take the piss now. If you want my, and the rest of the public vote in 2010, I would strongly advise against pursuing this idea.

Look you just have to accept that taxes have to rise to cover the spiraling pensions costs. The only people with money to pay these taxes are working people, and since working people HAVE to use the roads to get to work, this is as good a way as any to tax them. You pay pay it as road tax or you can pay it as a 50% base rate of income tax.... your choice. At least as a road tax it FEELS like your earning more.

i would also like to add that if road charging goes ahead, all our groceries and other shopping bills will also rise due to manufacturers passing on the cost of there road charges onto there products, they wont be paying it they will just pass on the cost to the buyer, i bet the government and other parties did not think of that did they,,

Maybe they should try having effective public transport and subsidising it from fuel tax like they originally promised us all in the 1990s. I do not expect to be tracked where ever I go by the State. I am not a criminal and do not have to submit to being 'tagged' like one.

Does any one else feel that they are being misrepresented when a leadership and party voted into power changes that leadership with out consultation. This is illegal under the companies act for a business, so why is it not for the one organisation that we all have an interest (both financial and other) in.

I want more done to tackle climate change. I have kids and I am worried state the world is going for them.

I know we are doing things here in Britain, but what about China, what about India?

The UK Government consultation website on the subject of the future of nuclear energy is at: http://nuclearpower2007.direct.gov.uk/
They want are opinions on nuclear power. I would be most pleased if you could mention Buxton Geothermal Turbine Generators in your comments. No more Chernobyls!




Please sign my Petition on Reversing Global Warming at: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/551646188

climate change has been happening for millions of years, no matter what we do its coming again whether or not were speeding it up, or if we can slow it down its gonna happen, i was reading on a site the other day that scientists drilling ice in the poles have said theres been at least 8 ice ages before, and also that the uk thousands of years ago used to have tropical temperatures, its a cycle, its gonna happen no matter what,,

Intelligent man. Well said. There was also a mini ice age in the 17th century and the medieval warm period. The climate fluctuates continually even between ice ages and it is in a constant state of change. There is a lot of junk science around mixed in with ideology and politics. I am glad that you see through it, well done, not many do.

i wrote the word speeding ( s p e e d i n g) why has it deleted half the word.

At a guess the rather blunt filter deleted the word P E E as it's classed as a profanity.

No! Especially as this time, Tony Blair had declared he'd be stepping down before he was elected.

He said he would serve a full third term, but would not fight the next general election.
Gordon Brown has no mandate, it's a sinister attempt from a sinister man to cling to power in England.
He was elected to represent his electorate on reserved matters only, the MSP for his constituency represents them on all domestic policies he will become the first minister for England but with no mandate from the people, and he is well aware of this as are the English electorate.
An election must be called as soon as he takes up office, it's called DEMOCRACY, a term alien to new labour.

"An election must be called as soon as he takes up office, it's called DEMOCRACY, a term alien to new labour."

A complete load of rubbish. John Major did no such thing, why should Gordon Brown?

This country is not a democracy, thank god. Look to history; see what good pure democracy did for ancient Athens! Gorden Brown is now merely the primary minister responsible for the government's actions accountable to the Queen.

Besides, given Tony Blair's presidential style of government, similar to that of Margaret Thatcher, we can't really have much of a grasp for what Brown actually stands for. Much better to see him in action for at least 6 months (since the Lords and the Queen will as always prevent anything too drastic).

I am from Northern Ireland and I admire the work the party has done to finally get Ian and Gerry to sit down with each other and power share.

I have just completed my degree in business studies and am at that transition period were I am trying to find a job, however the only ones available are poorly paid which makes me feel that education is waste of time. Our Economy was built on the public sector unfortuantely, and unless we generate more buiness by attracting outside investment the liitle buiness jobs we do have will remain extremly competitive.

Eduaction is supposed to reap rewards however unless I move across the water or take a call centre job (no qualifications needed) I will probaly end up packing shelves in Tesco for the rest of my life.

I plead with Mr Brown lower the corpoartion tax and you will benifit in the long term, we have a good flow of graduates who these firms will hopefully recruit and with a booming economy in turn you will benifit much more.

Also reform the eduaction system. I feel that students should have the option to choose langage classes and not have them forced upon them. I learnt french and spanish but have never used them and I have forgot them. this is the case for 100,000s possibly more, teach GCSE enterprise instead get people exicted about the possiblity of starting business instead of teaching subjects they will never use.

Support trade firms to set up apprenticeships for those that may feel that eduaction is not the way to go. I wish I had have took the trade root now. A steady stream of plumbers,builders, carpenters etc is better than a steady cue in the dole line.

I am 22 and have seen numerous friends drop out and end up on the dole as they were in weaker classes and were being taught subjects that 1. they did not have the mental capacity to absorb the knowledge and 2. they did not have the interest. If they had have been trained to be painters for example this may have been different.

Refering back to the GCSE enterprise, we need to get rid of our risk adverse nature what better way than to target the young at this level, how fun would it be for 3rd years to create buiness plans and generate ideas compared to learning french, one will leave an long term effect on you the other will be disregarded, if a student really wants to study langage it should be through choice.

Thank you for your time, and I hope Mr Brown gets this.

I am concerned about non domicile non taxpayers. They choose to live in our Country because of the quality of life they have. Why the reluctance to tax them?
If they leave so be it. I do not think the majority will leave.
Gordon Brown has the ability to be a good Prime Minister.

You can't tax them... who do you think will be paying for the labour parties next election campaign... check the stats from last time!

UPDATE: 4 Non-Dom private-equity cheifs donate £500,000 to the Labour party election funds.

The young lady above states that the future of Britian is looking bleak. Considering she was only three years old when Mr Blair became Prime Minister,I would say the future looks good if the majority of teenagers are as eloquent with words as she is.Mr Blair and his cabinet have made mistakes,so have past Tory goverments.
No doubt mistakes will be made in the future.But this is true of all governing bodies throughout the world. e

I have just read Hillary Benn's speech, "Where does Development fit in Foreign Policy?" and I think it is cracking, really good.
Please may I say that I would really like to see an end to Britain's possession of nuclear weapons. Love and peace go together; I think that trust can go with them, and respect of the people of developing nations. We are in this wonderful world together.
Sincerely, Joe

We don't need Nukes so we can use them, but us having them stops other people attacking us. Personally, I think that with the entire BRitish army away in Iraq, having some sort of deterent is a pretty good idea. With our armed forces all over the place, even Jersey could sucessfully invade and take over.

I grew up in a working class area which has gradually become a middle class area. House prices in this area have quadrupled in the last ten years along with the surrounding areas. I as a firstime buyer cannot get on the property ladder in a reasonably respectable area. Therefore i have no choice (if i want to get on the property ladder)but to buy a property in an area which will have one or more of the following qualities:- high crime rate,high unemployment rate, anti social behaviour,vandalism,deteriorating properties and burnt out cars. I would not feel safe in my own home,let alone venturing out to work everyday. As i have opted not to put myself on the property ladder in one of the few affordable areas as it also runs the risk of negative equity, I rent at a very high monthly sum. What will the Labour party do to help the first time buyer? What about making the affordable areas more desireable to live in? Charlotte Bradley

I am 57 and always voted labour until now. I recently got involved with the NHS & Social Services regarding the care for my 83 year old mother who has Dementia, cannot walk and is double incontinent. All they are interested in in selling her home to pay for her care. This is shameful, my father fought at Anzio, always paid taxes etc. The Labour party should hold its head done in shame for allowing the hard earned homes of old people that built this country to be stolen from them. It seems to me that If you have nothing you get everything, and if you have saved and contributed to the country you get discriminated against and lose everything. Gordon Brown needs to consider the power of the 'Grey' population to remove him at the next election.

A better question would be why are pensioners living alone in 3 bedroomed detaches house while famiies with children live in bedsits?

Old people say that their "house is their pension" and then refuse to move out of it when they hit retirement, expecting todays workers to pay to heat there huge houses.

Then when they die the children will have to sell the houses to pay the inheritence tax anyway.

Why doesn't she sell the the house anyway and use the money while she can. £200k can pay for some excelent private medical care.

The use of remote technology is a great missed opportunity in giving access to employment for people who are restricted as to the hours they can be away from home , such as lone parents and carers and indeed lone parent carers. Apparently 25-30% of lone parents who are not working care for a disabled child. Although some of these groups may relish the chance to get out of the house and to work, I do feel that homeworking for these groups is something which hasn't been fully explored. And I'm not talking packing widgets for 2 and a half p per trillion. Too often working from home is the preserve of those who have climbed to the top of the tree in the traditional out at the office way and then earned the right to structure their job as they choose.

The installation of home offices would also tackle congestion and emissions.

Just a thought.

Dear Leslie,

Just like my husbands post with regards our M/P RENEGING on our case, and will not be helping us any more.

It has vanished, cannot find it anywhere

OR IS BIG SPIN BROTHER WATCHING US AND CLAMPING DOWN ON BOAT ROCKERS ???????????????

The future of BRITAIN or the future of ENGLAND? With the trend towards independence from the Scots and the Welsh, should we be looking at how we can safely have a Labour government in Westminster after all the Scots and Welsh Labour MPs have gone. I'm concerned about the future of Scunthorpe and the other poorer parts of the country if we end up with a majority of Tories or bumbling Libdems in England. Failing to think about this and plan for it now could turn out to be a big booboo.

Now then, you need to get a hold of property prices - I'll never be able to get a house at this rate!

You need to give more mony to sort out mental helth. More people have problems with it in th UK than before and they need to be a priority

I agree with the first sentence of the above letter. I have been to America several times to visit family members,and this country has a terrible record for the young,old,and poor.
Our country looks after people much better than a lot of other countries.
I am a pensioner,I am disabled, and suffer from various illnesses,and I am
looked after very well. On a different
subject,I am not one hundred percent sure that Gordon Brown,should be the next prime minister. Anyone out there who would like to convince me.

Unfortunately my thoughts towards the Labour Party are currently more negative. I work for the Leicestershire Partnership Trust, a mental helth trust that covers the whole of Leicestershire. Unfortunately due to a distribution of funding that has focused on the PCTs and the populist causes that seek publicity there have been ward closures, job losses and mandatory training has been completely stopped. Staff morale is at an all time low, we have been offered a pay rise that is below inflation and the career that I have spent the last 5 years working for is not looking anything like the 'job for life' I had imagined.

I have recently applied for a job in mental health services and was looking upon it as a job for life but you have sown doubts in my mind. What worries me more though is the complete in ability to afford a house. With no social housing being built I will never be able to afford a mortgage and will stay living in a nasty bedsit (poverty if I were a child) because I cannot afford to rent a flat in Watford. Why should I bother working when my future looks so bleak, I think I'm going to withdraw my application completely.

I think we have to make sure that the promises made by the G8 on international development are kept ,by all the G8 members . Britain has done a lot to lead the way on this in recent years and we have to make sure that it stays high up the list of priorities over the next decade. This seems to be something that Gordon Brown is passionate about, I hope he continues to get other countries to honour their development commitments.

The UK Government consultation website on the subject of the future of nuclear energy is at: http://nuclearpower2007.direct.gov.uk/
They want are opinions on nuclear power. I would be most pleased if you could mention Buxton Geothermal Turbine Generators in your comments. No more Chernobyls!




Please sign my Petition on Reversing Global Warming at: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/551646188

let me bring the topic of road charging in here, one its to try and cut congestion and 2 its to save the enviroment, lets just say if the government charge me 25p a mile to drive on an A ROAD with no congestion. i travel 22 miles round trip to work and back with no busses going that way. 22 miles 5 days a week 52 weeks a year will cost me at 25p a mile £1430 a year just to get to work, with the cost of fuel aswell it wont be worth me working, i will have to sign on the dole. a taxi fair one way to where i work is in excess of £15 so there and back again would cost in excess of £30 a day. this is not the way to go. if we get the higher charge of £1.30 a mile it would cost me £7436.00 what a joke. i,m thinking i might emigrate. this countrys going to the dogs,

The future of Britain shouldn't include children in poverty. It's just wrong that in a rich country that's doing well we still leave children to grow up in abject poverty. It's good that the numbers have been turned round in the last ten years, but the fact is that the government will have to work much, much harder if we are to get justice for Britain's poorest children. It's a moral issue and it has to come first.

Children will always live in poverty as long as the unfair tax system taxes the working people rather han the mega-rich landlords. You pay income tax, council tax and rent-tax. Landlords just collect ret-tax and pay none of the others.

It is scandalous that he should remain after the debacle in the Gulf & subsequent media chaos.Also his willingness to allow BUNKER BUSTERS to be shipped through the UK at a time when the govt should've been calling for a ceasefire.
(sorry if this is a non sequitur)

I'm talking about DES BROWN.
(apologies once again)