Iain Duncan Smith, has been a failure and a liar, most of his life. Despite this, he has been put in charge of a department, and pursues a draconian regime against the less fortunate of the UK’s population. This is only possible, because we do not have a true democracy in the UK.
The list of changes to benefits and public services listed below, staying at home and not voting, is not an option.
The Conservative Government managed to push through a bill through that threatens everyones Human Rights. The right to a fair trial in an open court, a right the Anglo-Saxons introduced and the Normans included in their laws. Now in the 21st Century, while our media concentrated on gay marriage, this backward policy slipped through unnoticed. This country has never been a democracy and is moving further away from ever being one.
I wrote to a number of our North West MEPs about EU’s trade with Israel, and received in reply, what I consider patronising nonsense. That the only thing that matters is the economic benefits of trading with Israel and not the continuing criminal acts of the illegal Sate of Israel. As the article below, points out, the Israelis are still mislabelling produce, so they can sell it in the EU
Here is the response from Robert Sturdy MEP Conservative Spokesman,Vice-Chairman, International Trade Committee:
Thank you for your email regarding this subject. I have received a number of emails relating to this issue and have passed them onto my colleague Robert Sturdy who is the Vice-Chairman of the International Trade Committee and Conservative Spokesman on the same subject, therefore he has a better understanding of these issues, his response is outlined below.
Jacqueline Foster MEP
MEP for North West England
Conservative Spokesman for Transport and Tourism
Response of Robert Sturdy MEP
Thank you for contacting me about the Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part, on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (CAA).
The EU-Israel CAA, until recently known as ACAA, is a technical framework agreement which aims at facilitating the elimination of technical barriers to trade in respect of certain industrial products, through the mutual recognition and harmonisation of technical standards. The CAA could be hugely beneficial to the EU as it could significantly reduce costs of imported pharmaceutical products into the EU and save time-to-market conditions (saving 1-3 years for every market product) for imported medicinal products both from Israel and the EU.
Although primarily an economic agreement, I think that it has the potential of not only bringing benefits to European consumers and importers of pharmaceutical products but also of helping to foster stability in the region by facilitating further harmonisation between EU and Israeli Law in the relevant areas.
From the perspectives of the Conservative members of the International Trade Committee (INTA), we believe that this particular agreement to be purely technical issue that should be judged on its trade merits alone. Furthermore it is simply a protocol to an already existing agreement between the EU and Israel.
However, this is not to say that the wider issues surrounding the Agreement are not valid. The Conservatives in the European are acutely aware of the ongoing situation in the Middle East and are supportive of peace efforts based on the Oslo Peace accords, the road map for peace and the quartet with a viable two state solution based roughly upon the 1967 borders, with land for peace exchanges taking place. Both sides need to realise their commitments to Human Rights and International Law. The EU can play a major role in bringing peace to the Middle East but it must be seen as fair and impartial. A similar agreement with the Palestinian Authority was agreed a number of months ago and I believe it would be hypocritical of the EU if it rejects this agreement.
Having said this, the Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee (AFET), which has the experience and expertise to give this issue the attention it deserves, has provided an Opinion on the ramifications vis-à-vis the situation in the Middle East which was passed on to all INTA members. Both the AFET and INTA Committees decided to submit a question to the Commission in a bid to address some of their concerns with regards to this agreement. The Commission has offered concrete assurances that the agreement is in conformity with EU legal commitments.
With regards, to the production of goods in the Occupied Territories, the EU has been clear it will not accept products originating from the Israeli Occupied Territories. This is prohibited under Community law which means that products coming from places (city, village or industrial zone) brought under Israeli Administration since 1967 are not entitled to benefit from preferential tariff treatment under the EU-Israel Association Agreement. This issue has been addressed in the INTA Committee in order to make sure that the CAA is in compliance with existing legislation.
The European Parliament voted in favour of the consent procedure concerning the additional protocol on conformity assessment on the 18th October 2012, with 379 votes in favour.
We will continue to correspond with civil society from both sides of the dispute and we will continue to monitor developments. Rest assured that the wider political situation, alongside the economic benefits, will not be ignored by the INTA Committee or by the Parliament at large.
Robert Sturdy MEP
MEP for East of England
Vice-Chairman of the International Trade committee
Whilst our politicians and media keep persecuting the less unfortunate in our society. Our politicians themselves keep flaunting the law and enriching themselves at the expense of us. It was time there was a full and determined investigation of all our politicians. After our MPs, then Manchester City Councillors.
The continuing sad story of the Britain returning to the ‘Dark Days’ of the Industrial Revolution, where workers found their wages continually cut. Plunging even working families into dire poverty, welcome to 21st Century Britain and the end of a National Health Service. What is also sad, despite Miliband’s rhetoric, is that Labour will not vote against the Benefits Bill. Ed Miliband to wage war on George Osborne’s welfare.
‘Senior Labour figures stopped short of confirming that Labour would vote against the cuts in the Commons in January. But it is understood that unless fundamental changes are made to the coming welfare uprating bill, Miliband will be prepared to give the order.
One senior Labour figure said there were still tensions inside the party, with a caucus of “new Labour” figures believing it will be politically suicidal to leave the party open to charges that it sides with “scroungers” and is in denial over the need to cut the benefits bill’.
Another journalist summed up the situation as Osborne’s war on the poor and the vile stupidity of his workers-vs-shirkers narrative. Unfortunately as the Guardian hints at, there are millionaire members in the Labour Party who believe in this same rhetoric. That is why people need to realise they have to vote, to rid us of these two obscene political parties.
I’ve spent the last few days looking through the oral testimony given to the Commons Health Select Committee on 13 November, as well as through the lengthy written testimony given to the committee ahead of the hearing by various organisations, on ‘public expenditure’ – basically the state of NHS finances and the progress toward achieving the ‘Nicholson Challenge’ of £20 billion in savings over the period from 2011-2015.
I was initially drawn to this evidentiary session because, among the witnesses, was Tony Spotswood – the CEO of Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch NHS Trust. Spotswood, as revealed in an email exchange I was able to publish for the first time recently, discussed a ‘coup’ plan to bring down the ‘NHS Employers’ organisation (NHSE) with Chris Bown, CEO of the neighbouring Poole NHS Trust.
NHSE is responsible for national negotiations with unions on the pay and conditions of the UK’s 1.7 million…
View original post 2,513 more words
An article about today’s Autumn budget, which is another attack on the vulnerable in our society. It is also a budget which promotes more gas-powered power stations, road building, increased dependence on fossil fuels and advocates the exploitation of shale-gas (fracking). All of which will have a further detrimental impact on the vulnerable and help accelerate climate change.
A blog about the privatisation of the National Health Service (NHS) by the present coalition. But the author does point out that Labour are to blame for the financial crisis of the NHS. And that Ed Milliband, if every elected, would only bring back the same disastrous Labour policies. In the mean time, the Liberal-Democrats do not seem to have anything to stop this privatisation. Unlike the rest of Europe, who have well funded health care services, the UK is following the USA route, where care is only for the rich.
And another article, this one from the Guardian newspaper, on how a few are profiting from the privatisation of the NHS:
As well as the USA, where residents are fighting the expansion of Shale Gas Methane extraction, known as ‘fracking’: The Marcellus Shale documentary project Photographing fracking. NYTimes com
it is also a problem in Australia with Coal-seam Methane extraction: http://youtu.be/wCMcr27uAg4
A thoughtful critique on George Osborne’s speech and all it entails. I would not agree with the writer that things were improving under Labour. I see them both, as seriously evil, political parties that protect the rich and corrupt. And have not taken on-board, the fact we have to move away from this ‘growth’ mentality. We live on one planet but living as if we live on three.
I’ve been a bit out of circulation since yesterday evening because of work travel, so maybe someone else has already done this. But maybe not. Most of the media reports I’ve seen on George Osborne’s speech yesterday at the Tory party conference have centred on his laughable scheme to have employees swap their employment rights for shares in their employer’s company. I’ll take a look at why it’s ridiculous too, but first I want to take a look at the other things he said and what they say about him.
My mother used to love reciting the old saying, ‘Whenever you point a finger at anyone else, you’re pointing three back at yourself’. Of course, that that was a form of finger-pointing never seemed to occur to her – but that doesn’t mean it isn’t often true!
So, let’s take a look at Osborne’s speech in some detail (though I’m…
View original post 2,098 more words