Replace the Human Rights Act with a UK Bill of Rights
One of the most important pieces of legislation of recent times will be torn up, so that the Tories can pick and choose which human rights are worth defending.
There is a lot of Labour legislation I haven't agreed with over the past 13 years, but they have done good as well, and it looks like we will lose a lot of the good legislation if the Tories get in.
The Liberal Democrats seem to be gaining quite a lot of support by their proposal to scrap Trident, but if you look into their policies further, you will find that they still wish to keep our nuclear 'deterrent', and the main reason for scrapping Trident is about saving money.
Liberal Democrats do not believe that the UK can afford the billions of pounds the Government wants to spend on a like-for-like replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system. Full-scale Trident is a cold war system that we no longer need nor can afford. We believe that less expensive alternatives should be considered.
While it is correct that Trident is a waste of money, which we cannot afford at the moment, this should not be the motivator for scrapping Trident.
Not replace Trident.We cannot conceive of any circumstances in which we would use these expensive and immoral weapons; we would decommission the existing system and not renew it.
As a child I remember seeing the following 'Protect and Survive' public information film, and it scared the hell out of me. Since then I have been vehemently against the ownership of nuclear weapons and do not believe there is any justification in keeping them.
No country should have the right to own such weapons of mass destruction. To use the is illegal under international law, as the kill indiscrimately.
We are also hypocrites to keep our own weapons and demand that other countries should not hold them.
If we want to be brokers for peace in the world we should ditch our nuclear programme now and lead by example.
I did support the Lib Dems in the last election, as under the leadership of Charles Kennedy it was clear where they stood, as a centre left party. I am somewhat amazed that there is now a sudden surge of support for the Lib Dems, as their policies do not differ much from the other two main parties. For example:
The Lib Dems support the war in Afghanistan
Although they have called for Trident to be scrapped, they still believe in keeping a nuclear deterrent
Cut £15bn from spending, which will result in public sector job losses.
The recent Green Party press release on the Lib Dems rightly questions their green credentials:
As Nick Clegg today launched his party’s environmental policies with a direct attack on the Greens, a Green Party spokesperson branded the Lib Dems “the biggest eco-charlatans on this part of the planet”:
“Objectively speaking, the Lib Dems are the least trustworthy party on the environment. They have proven themselves the party most likely to say one thing and do another. Their track record is spotty to say the least.
“They say they want a low-carbon economy with new green jobs. But last week they revealed a plan to put the pathetic sum of £3bn into this, promising only a few thousand new jobs. The Green Party, on the other hand, has started with science-based CO2 targets, done the arithmetic and shown how to pay for a £44bn green investment package, which would create over a million new jobs.
“The Lib Dems talk about stopping roadbuilding but they’ve supported practically every new road from the Newbury bypass to the M74, and they’re still supporting the Lancaster Northern Bypass. They opposed Heathrow’s third runway but they’ve supported Manchester’s second runway and airport expansions just about everywhere else. They talk about green waste management but they currently support incinerator projects in Exeter, Plymouth and Barnstaple. In Essex they’ve proclaimed support for a zero waste strategy, which means no incineration, but they’re still supporting incinerators in Essex.
“They say they want a zero carbon economy by 2050, but they’ve opposed windfarm proposals in Cornwall, Cumbria, Devon and Worcestershire. In Lewisham they recently voted against a Green Party budget package that would have insulated 25,000 homes for free.
“In their proposed ‘green tax switch’ the Lib Dems promised to ‘cut income tax and switch to green taxes on pollution instead’ – which means either we’d have less money for schools and hospitals as we reduce pollution, or else we have to keep polluting in order to keep the tax revenue coming in.
“Frankly, the Lib Dems are the biggest eco-charlatans on this part of the planet.”
I'm not saying the Lib Dems do not have some worthwhile policies. I do support their plans to scrap ID cards and bring in electoral reform, but the Green Party also promises to do this.
I do not have a Green candidate in my constituency of York Outer, but the one thing which above anything else stops me from voting Lib Dem, is their refusal to rule out supporting a Tory minority government. I do not want to vote Lib Dem and getting Tory.
Lastly I would recommend the Green Party party political broadcast which was premiered today, showing that we don't believe there is little difference between the 3 main parties.
After reading Paul Waugh's Evening Standard blog which listed Top 100 Twitter 'Influentials' I though it would be interested to produce a list of the top 100 Green Tweeters. I have based the list on the same formula used by Paul which runs Twitter usernames through the TweetLevel website. The score it gives is based on:
Influence - what you say is interesting and many people listen to it. This is the primary ranking metric.
Popularity - how many people follow you
Engagement - you actively participate within your community
The tool does not work on users who have protected their tweets, so there will be a few notable exceptions.
Anyhow, here is the list:
Ranking
Username
1
TheGreenParty
2
darryl1974
2
carolinelucas
4
sianberry
5
Jasonkitcat
5
garydunion
7
brumguvnor
8
Jim_Jepps
9
kemptownben
9
chalkface2009
9
GreenFeed
12
mr_andy_c
12
patrickharvie
12
TonyJuniper
12
imaginedpm
16
RupertRead
16
natalieben
18
DarrenJohnsonAM
18
aleddilwyn
20
GoHod
21
Scott_Redding
21
GreenRupertRead
23
GreenJennyJones
24
leonora1
24
AdrianRamsay
26
LGBTGreens
26
alexforgoldsmid
26
PeterTatchell
29
HackneyMatt
29
AdrianWindisch
31
VickyWJ
32
nineveh_havant
32
anothergreen
32
greenladywell
35
highburyonfoot
35
MartinJDeane
37
adrianhollister
38
tom_chance
39
DocRichard
39
jennimiles
39
Blakesley
42
jimpreece
42
lasophielle
42
SouthwarkGP
42
hornseymatters
42
stuartjeffery
42
camdengp
42
JonNott
49
SimonGrover
49
lewgreenparty
49
BrumGreens
49
GreenGreenwich
53
ladyroisin
53
CharlieBGP
55
kevinwarnes
55
samcoatesUK
55
BarnardSteve
55
DilysCluer
59
busker999
59
clrandrewcooper
59
central_devon
59
bobbyblanc
59
chrisw100
59
GayleODonovan
65
Martinwhiteside
65
phil4northwilts
65
Martinwhiteside
65
CllrRMallender
69
MattHanley
69
StokeyGreens
69
mr_teatime
69
liverpoolGP
69
MarcusHemsley
69
biggreenfactory
69
TeresaDelaney
76
SvenRufus
76
LouisStephen
76
GinaDowding
76
shanoakes
76
stormpoorun
76
WalesGreenParty
76
Swlgbtgreens
76
EastBerksGP
76
GreenHighbury
85
GreenDPerrett
85
NorwichGreens
85
HulmeGreenParty
85
YHGreens
89
kentgreenparty
89
LeicsGreenParty
89
EastOxGreeens
89
Sheffieldgreens
93
bowesgreens
93
JackGJohnson
93
jamesbcy
93
KTGreens
93
worcsgreenparty
93
greenredflag
99
ThePiper54
99
swanseagreens
Okay, it is just a bit of fun with numbers. But I hope it also shows how well Green activists have taken to Twitter and use it to help promote the Green message.
I am no cheer leader for Nick Clegg but I found this recent article in the Daily Mail to be pretty vile. To have an introduction to an article with the following text is xenophobic gutter politics:
His wife is Spanish, his mother Dutch, his father half-Russian and his spin doctor German. Is there ANYTHING British about Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg?
Parties should be challenged on their policies rather than trying to whip up xenophobic hatred against their leaders.
It shows the obvious panic of Tory supporters to be stooping to such depths.
I received a leaflet today from the UKIP candidate for York Outer, Judith Morris. One sentence immediately rang alarm bells, her concern about "the negative effects of political correctness". So I thought I would dig around to find out a bit more about our UKIP candidate. I did not need to look far as I came across a Q & A section on the UKIP website
On gay couples booking a room in a B & B:
With regard to the B & B question, I believe that the proprietors, like pub landlords, should have the right to serve or not anyone staying in their home.
Asked about the country's "lax moral standards":
However, I would firmly be against same sex marriages, abortion and euthenasia - but I re-iterate these are my own personal views but I would vote this way if given that option.
It is with dismay, but not surprise that the 3 main parties have little to offer when it comes to our defence policy. Labour, Conservative and Lib Dems are all committed to keeping our troops in Afghanistan, even though there is no sign of end to the war. In fact, by the end of the year we will have been in longer than the Soviet Union, who could not take control of the country with a much larger force than we have committed.
The Green Party offers a real alternative with a commitment to remove our troops from Afghanistan, as it is now absolutely clear that our security has been compromised, not improved, by our part in the counter-productive invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.
On nuclear weapons Labour and the Tories are committed to renewing Trident. The Lib Dems have said they will cancel it but keep a minimum nuclear deterrent. The Green Party would not only scrap Trident but would decommission the existing system and not renew it.
So the choice is clear. If you want to commit our country to a secure and peaceful future vote Green.
UK aircraft and those from many other countries have been grounded since Thursday due to the ash cloud being formed from the eruption of the Iceland volcano Eyjafjallajökull which is drifting across Europe.
The crisis could be over in days, but there is no certainty that this will be the case, and the disruption could spill over into weeks or months.
At the moment most of the media attention is on holiday makers who are stranded. But now stories have started to appear about the piles of rotting produce in Africa which cannot be imported while planes are grounded. As reported on the BBC News site:
One of the UK's biggest fresh fruit importers said business had ground to a halt because of the disruption.
Anthony Pile, chairman of Blue Skies, said the company was losing £100,00 a day as produce was rotting in Brazil and Africa.
"Losing a day is a disaster, losing three days is unbelievable and I don't know what we're going to do if we go into the middle of next week," he said.
Transporting food across the world is completely unsustainable and it is time we started to completely re-evaluate our dependence on food from outside the country and moved back to local food production.
May be a natural occurrence like this is just what we need to highlight the failings of our current system.
The Tories have now outlined their tax plans, to give married couple and those in civil partnerships a tax break of around £150 a year. The first thing I noticed about this was the late addition of civil partnerships, presumably added to try and take some heat of the Chris Grayling incident.
It would apply to basic rate taxpayers earning under £44,000 where one partner does not use their full personal tax-free income allowance.
Is this supposed to act as an incentive for one spouse to stay at home?
Do the Tories really think such a trivial amount will encourage couples to marry or not to divorce?
The proposed tax is unfair for a whole host of reasons. It discriminates against unmarried couples and single people for no just reason. Single people often struggle much more financially as they have pay a mortgage and bills on one income, and as a result of this measure they will also be expected to pay more tax than married couples.
You would have thought the Tories would have learnt by now not to impose their moral standards upon the public. Particularly as it back-fired so badly against them with their Back to Basics campaign in the 90s.
They are funding this scheme by a new levy on the banks. Surely any income brought in should be used to reduce our national debt or protect public services. Instead any savings or new sources of income the Tories are highlighting are being used to offer tax incentives to win votes.
Today's article in the Observer came as no surprise to me. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling was recorded as saying:
"I think we need to allow people to have their own consciences," he said. "I personally always took the view that, if you look at the case of should a Christian hotel owner have the right to exclude a gay couple from a hotel, I took the view that if it's a question of somebody who's doing a B&B in their own home, that individual should have the right to decide who does and who doesn't come into their own home."
Supporting such behaviour is unacceptable. B & B owners who display such hostility to gay couples are no better than those who used to display signs saying "No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish". This sort of behaviour no longer happens and is universally condemned as well as illegal. It is also illegal to refuse a room to gay couples and should be seen as just as unacceptable.
Everybody has the right to their opinions, regardless of how abhorrent we find them. What they don't have a right to do is to offer a selective service to the public based on their beliefs. If people hold homophobic beliefs they are clearly not suitable candidates for running a bed and breakfast.
This latest episode is just the latest in a series of blunders on LGBT rights by the Tories, most recent being the interview Cameron did with the Gay Times which showed a shocking lack of ignorance about what his colleagues were up to in the European parliament re LGBT rights. When he showed that he was unaware that Conservative MEPs refused to support a motion which condemned a new homophobic law in Lithuania.
Would you take an organ if you needed one? Nearly everyone would. But only 28% of us have joined the Organ Donor Register. More than 10,000 people in the UK currently need a transplant. Of these, 1000 each year – that's three a day - will die waiting as there are not enough organs available.
My personal view is that the current system should be changed to an opt-out system. I can understand how some people have cultural or religious reasons for not wanting to be on the register, and an opt-out system would accommodate them. Having such a system would no doubt increase the amount of available donors.
After all, most of us, if we were ill would like to think that we would not have to wait a long period of time for a donor. And if we rely on this system we should also be willing to contribute to it.
