THIS GOVERNMENT AND ALL governments waste taxpayers money on a monumental scale. The previous government poured billions of pounds into a new computer system for the NHS only to see it fail. The MoD wastes billions on projects that cost twice as much to complete than was contractually agreed, and arrive years behind the time scale determined at the time of purchase. Tens of billions of pounds are wasted annually by our representatives (far more, by the way, than city bankers get in bonuses), but with little comeback.
But what happens when they get it right? What happens when a piece of technology costing millions to put in place actually does the job it was designed to do? Then those who use it are told not to - at least at a time when it is most needed.
The ordinary officer of the UK Boarder Force, the body which polices our entry points to keep out illegal entrants, must have jumped with joy when they were provided with a new piece of equipment that scans the passports of entrants to the UK and allows them to check whether the passport matched the holder by crosschecking to a computer data base. This technology replaced the reliance upon the border guard to compare the ID photo on the passport with the face staring at him or her over a desk.
Is not technology wonderful? Well it would be if we took the trouble to use it. But the trouble in this case, was that the technology took longer than the cursory glance to fulfil its task, which at our airports and seaports busiest times, became a nuisance. So it was decided that at such times the technology would be unplugged to shorten the lengthening queues.
Now what this meant was that at such times and over a four year period hundreds of thousands of people entered this country without being subjected to little more than a nod of the head.
WHAT ARE WE PAYING OUR politicians for? First of all they, as legislators, cannot make and pass laws unless they refer to Europe first, or face seeing them undermined by our judges… which, you must agree, makes our appearance at the ballot box a fruitless enterprise.
Then there is Theresa May: if we are to take what she says as the truth, then our civil servants are all a law unto themselves acting without her authority. This is not as fanciful as it seems, for our politicians are as much in hock to the public sector as they are to Brussels. It seems that when the public become perturbed about an issue within a particular branch of the public sector, and the government wishes to soothe such anxiety; they demand changes that meet the public’s concerns.
What happens however; is when the politicians pull the leavers that are meant to assuage the public, the public sector ignores them completely, and continues on as before.
This is what happened over the issue of inter-racial adoption. The politicians are now finally convinced that the colour of a child’s skin matters little to the child when what it needs are two parents willing to love it, and make the sacrifices for it that any other parent would do for their own biological children.
However, our social workers have their own take on such an arrangement. With their investiture at a third rate university espousing all forms of political correctness, and armed with the latest academic fad (usually from across the pond) on adoption; our fully qualified social workers do not fear the dimwittedness of politicians who now nothing about interracial adoption and the danger it poses for the African, Asian, and West Indian child … etcetera. So certain are they in their latest academic dogma that they feel themselves morally obliged to carry on as before, for the sake of the child’s cultural identity.
In other words, the politicians can issue all the instructions they like to their public sector ‘professionals’; there is little the politicians can do because the Multicultural society they themselves were the architects of, give the social workers ample justification for their noncompliance.
From wasting the tax payer’s money and handing over power to the European Union; as well as allowing government agencies to ignore government demands. It leaves us, the voters, to question our very relevance to the democratic process; or whether there is democratic process to be part of.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY 650 members of the House of Commons and 750 members of the House of Lords. We are represented by 1400 members of both houses. The basic MPs salary is £64,766; on top of which, with the usual allowances, the ordinary back bencher can add generously (by ordinary people’s standards) to his basic salary: and if he or she have the ambition to reside on the government or opposition front benches; or serve on one of the many Committees; then, they can earn anything from between £79,082 and £197,689[i].
Considering the powers they have allowed to be removed from both themselves and the British people, and given to Europe; and considering the billions they have wasted on various forms of public expenditure; and considering the folly of many of their decisions over (for instance) immigration, and the added cost to the public purse of such wrong decision making; should we not be paying closer attention to our elected representatives instead of a few bankers whose bonuses are a populist distraction from where we as a people, clinging on precariously to our nationhood, should be concentrating our energies?
We face a problem of overcrowding in this country. First of all generically; but also politically: and it is with the latter that, in these harsh times, I feel we should pay greater attention. For several decades I believe we have seen a diminution in the quality of this country’s leadership, and, considering the power they have abdicated through treaty after treaty with Europe in that time; they have made their vast numbers redundant to any practical governance of this Island.
Of the 650 MPs; 450 should suffice. As for the second chamber. I would make it an all elected one if it were not for fact that it would see itself as ethically equal to the first; and it would be correct in so doing. So like the Commons, the Lords should have a limit placed upon their numbers and also upon the quality of expertise of their numbers
First of all, for a second chamber to outnumber its elected lawmaking counterpart is an insult to the electors; especially as it is a revising body based upon appointment.
The second chamber, if only as a courteous act to the elected first, should contain lesser members. It should become a workplace instead of a club. Of the 750 members of this club, 200 could be gotten rid of immediately, and those who serve in the future should be picked from those professions that any nation deems worthy of such advancement; instead of what the politicians deem a reward for services to their party.
The second chamber should be populated by those with experience of the world of business and those with academic excellence in subjects that will oil the country’s economic success. The first and dominant chamber is the place for the people to decide who they judge to be worthy of their vote; but even this can only work if those they elect are truly free from any kind of foreign intrusion negating their law making.
We have a parliament designed, in numerical terms, to meet the needs of a long gone empire, instead of an island nation of 60 million people; while America, a country several times lager in both space and population to our own manages with a Congress of 434 , and a Senate of 100. So both houses have 866 fewer members serving on the public tit than does our own parliament… while representing a population of 300 million people.
OUR POLITICIANS HAVE WASTED billions; allowed, as a deliberate act of policy, the uncontrolled entry of hundreds of thousands of immigrants from all for corners of the planet; and allowed our nation’s sovereignty to be slowly abandoned to the European project - while denying us any say through a referendum for fear of the people reclaiming it for themselves.
All parties have colluded with Multiculturalism; the Tories through fear and the Labour Party as its author. But the British people had no say on any of this. Multiculturalism has created the new breed of witches and witch finders. John Terry, the Chelsea footballer (not one of my favourite people) has fallen victim to becoming a modern witch…or racist as we now like to call them.
In all, the politicians have done a thoroughly bad job for the British people and their island nation. In 90 per cent of the cases, our modern politicians have fallen well short of their historical predecessors. Substance has been replaced by style and image; and so we get the end product of this shallow process…a kind of photogenic contest between the politicians whose leaders are now chosen by the electorate to ‘govern’ us in X Factor style, via the Leadership Debates that were the main feature of the last general election; and went a considerable way toward the election of a coalition government.
Voting is only useful if the people you vote for have both the independence and power to make laws that go unchallenged once adopted by parliamentary due process; voting is only useful if the politicians see their primary historical function as protecting our national sovereignty; voting is only useful if we abandon the professional, superficial and telegenic master of the sound bite; and finally; voting is only useful if the people are trusted via referendums to determine their country’s destiny without the shallow heads monopolising such fundamental decisions.
[i] Figures taken from the Tax Payers Alliance
No comments:
Post a Comment