Tuesday, 8 September 2009

Gavin Webb crosses floor to join Libertarian Party



Gavin Webb, who was selected as the Liberal Democrat prospective parliamentary candidate for Burton in 2008 and elected as a Lib Dem councillor on Stoke-on-Trent City Council in 2007, has today announced that he has resigned from the Liberal Democrats.

He says: "I have made a good many friends in my fourteen years of activism in the Liberal Democrats and I hope that those friendships will continue, but regretfully I have decided to resign from the Liberal Democrats.

"The party, like the Conservative and Labour parties, has become a party of the establishment. It has unfortunately firmly wedded itself to the belief that there are primarily government solutions to the problems facing our country, and in the process, they are adopting policies that undermine our rights and freedoms as individuals.

"As far as I can see, most political parties in the UK appear to trust individuals when it comes to voting for councillors, MPs and MEPs, but once comfortably in power they are reluctant to trust individuals when it comes to them making choices about their own lives.

"There is however one political party - the Libertarian Party - that believes in giving responsibility back to individuals over their own lives and their own finances; and it is this party that I have now decided to join.

"We are on the road of authoritarianism, where government is our ruler rather than us being the ruler of our government. It is time for each and every single one of us to make a stand against government and those who feed off it, and demand the reduction of its size and scope.

"From what I've seen from many Lib Dem parliamentarians and councillors I don't believe the Liberal Democrat Party has the inclination to argue for smaller government in defence of our individual rights.

"Though there are some good classical liberal and libertarian types in the party, with whom I hope to continue to have a good relationship, their voices are crowded out by people who believe it perfectly okay to dictate to people how they should live their lives. I don't wish any longer to be a part of that.

"As an active member of the Libertarian Party, I will campaign to inform people that there are more voluntary, rather than coercive ways in which to influence positive outcomes for themselves, their families and the wider community. I hope to impress upon people that though there may be a need for government of some sort, it doesn't have to be government of the size and expense we see today.

Libertarian Party Leader Ian Parker- Joseph said

It has been a pleasure over the past months to speak with Gavin on numerous occasions, and following a meeting with him last month can attest to his personal commitment to the libertarian values on which he was elected, a man of honour, integrity and a passion for doing the right thing for his constituents.

I am therefore very pleased on behalf of The Libertarian Party to welcome Gavin Webb into the only party that wholly and uniquely stands for libertarian ideals in the UK.

I know that there is a great sadness from Gavin that the Liberal Democrat leadership were unable to rise to the challenge of veering away from the belief that the State has the answers to all our ills. It is a sadness shared by many.

In that light I hope that there are many more who now see the time as right to make the same changes that Gavin Webb has undertaken, not just from the Lib Dems but also those in the Conservative Libertarian wing who are unsuccessfully looking for reforms that will never come, and instead to look to a party that believes in libertarianism as a way of life, rather than one which merely gives lip service to it.

The Libertarian Party is here to stay, and new members such as Gavin Webb can only enhance the message that his constituents so clearly wanted to hear, and that Gavin Webb is living on their behalf.

Libertarian Party Chairman Andrew Withers said-

"Whilst we have a number of Parish and Town Councillors, Gavin is the first City Councillor that has crossed the floor to a truly Radical Party, one that wants to change the relationship between State and the Individual to the point where the State is subordinate to the will of the people, not the people subordinate to the will of the State.

Furthermore, the Libertarian Party argues that State should be small and accountable.

"We welcome Gavin, and hope that his decision will galvanise other Libertarians in other parties to join with us on the long march back to individual Liberty."


Gavin Webb Can Be Contacted On 07949 026660

Libertarian Party (LPUK) 0845 299 7650

Email Contact@lpuk.org


I have long maintained that the doors of LPUK would remain firmly open to anyone who wanted to stop, take a step back and realise that trying to reform the existing Big Parties in the ways of Libertarianism was like banging ones head on a brick wall.

This is a door that Gavin has chosen to walk through, and I sincerely hope that with his brave first move, it will galvanise others who have been sitting on the fence watching, waiting to see who would be the first.

We have well formed policies, we put the people before vested interests, we put people before the wishes of the establishment and the EU, and the consistency of our policies means that we will not be issuing new policy documents every week as we see from the Conservatives and LibDems.

We are not fooled by the PR work of Cameron, the flip flopping of Clegg nor the increasingly desperate pronouncements from Downing St. We are clear and concise in what needs to be done for the UK, for its peoples to be free from government interference, to be free of daily suspicions, to be free from surveillance, to be free from privateers acting under legislative protection to levy and fine for every infringement of draconian rules, but to be able to live their lives as each sees fit to do so.

Gavin Webb has taken the first steps, we will be looking to you, your friends, family and neighbours to follow him in taking the next steps and making the Libertarian party a real political force in the UK.

Tuesday, 14 July 2009

IanPJ speech to Parliamentary Conference on Global Economic meltdown

As Leader of the Libertarian Party UK, I had the pleasure yesterday (Monday 13th July) to spend the day at Westminster, attending as a speaker the Parliamentary Conference on Global Financial and Economic Meltdown.
This lively event, hosted by Lord Tarsem King of West Bromwich was held in Committee rooms 3 and 4a in the House of Lords, and was organised jointly by Global Vision 2000 and the Universal Peace Federation UK.
There were a variety of speakers at this conference, including:
Dr.Nafeez Ahmed : Director, Institute for Policy Research and Development
Anne Belsey: Monetary Reform Party                                                                                
Canon Peter Challen:Chairman, Christian Council for Monetary Justice                                                                                       
Kelvin Hopkins MP - Labour, Luton North
Ian Parker-Joseph   Leader,  Libertarian Party
Daud Pidcock: Global Vision 2000                                                           
David Triggs: Coalition for Economic Justice & Executive Chair, Henry George Foundation
Dr.Adrian Wrigley Systemic Fiscal Reform Group     
The full text of the 10 minute speech given by myself is below, although much of the presentation was interspersed with ad hoc examples and comments,
the Monetary Reform solution was presented in the Q&A session due to time constraints.
At no time in history has any individual had such a wealth of information at their fingertips.  With this in mind, you would think it would be easy to take the pulse of the global economy but at no time in history has the global economy been so rich, varied, and rapid.
Business systems of increasing complexity govern our lives in ways the classic economists could never have envisaged.  Entire industries collapse without anything tangible ever disrupting supply chains and nations fall bankrupt on the "market confidence" of Wall Street traders.  We live in a world of inconceivable numbers and we live in blissful ignorance of business and financial practices we never knew existed… until they go spectacularly wrong.
No government can ever control an economy.  All those who have sought to do so have destroyed it.  One can only manage ones' responses to events in it.  While we may like to gear our economy in a certain way, our economies do not run in isolation of each other. Thanks to globalisation and the internet we are inextricably linked and we cannot pretend otherwise. Which is why the proposals that I will put forward later will cover both domestic and international economics.
As world leaders try to move us ever closer towards international  regulations and international bodies of control, there is only one constant. 
Systems of whatever type, inevitably fail… be they computer systems, regulatory systems or currency systems. This presents the immediate reality that if we use only one system then when it fails, we all fail. And we all fail at the same time.
Undeterred by this reality it has not prevented our leaders from seeking to standardise, make uniform and equalise our systems.  But each society has its own unique perspectives and interests, any such common systems require either a democracy bypass or compromise which fundamentally weakens the basis of the system.  In global banking we have seen both. 
We have also witnessed institutional schizophrenia whereby one regulator does not know what the other is doing or even what it is for, and our  politicians do not know the extent of their powers or to whom the real power belongs.
What we saw last year was the culmination of national, regional and global government intervening in things they do not understand and cannot control. 
The oft quoted cause of this crisis is "irresponsible lending" and "excessive risk" by "greedy bankers".  But that is only half way to the truth. 
The credit crunch is a failure of global regulation as a tool, leading to the construction of castles on a foundation of jelly, such international regulation is now wholly discredited.
Risk is its own regulator when governments do not seek to meddle, and had we retained control of our own regulation, the crisis here need not have hit us as hard as it did.

We are all aware of the disposal of the assets that US banks were legally obliged to create under the Community Reinvestment Act, creating loans worth more than their balance sheets. This put a direct freeze on interbank lending. This subsequent freeze in capital flow sent shockwaves through the markets resulting in instant paralysis.
Subsequently we were forced by circumstance to take a leap of faith that bailouts would restore market confidence and jumpstart interbank lending.  Whether or not this has worked is, frankly, anyone's guess.
There are conflicting signal signs and while there may be room for optimism we have been warned by the IMF this week that Britain cannot afford another bailout, which may yet be necessary. Among all the talk of "green shoots of recovery" the fear is that we will enter a double dip recession.  The contraction of the job market further could lead to bigger credit defaults, not least on credit card debt which is now outstripping our GDP.
Our present administration has taken it upon itself to bailout everything that so much as squeaks. This is a path to economic suicide. 
Even if such measures worked, this is all a sticking plaster at best. Present policy is predicated on the idea that a debt based economy is sustainable and desirable. It is not. UK Plc needs to be producing and exporting, earning money from overseas.
The Domestic Economy needs to be stimulated from the bottom up not the top down. Economies are sustained by the ability of the purchasing public to earn, save and spend, consuming the products that the factories produce.
There is little point in bailing out a failing car manufacturer to see them make cars that they cannot sell.
Put simply it is not capitalism that has failed, it is creditism. Capitalism was designed to work on capital, but it has been distorted and altered to rely on credit, spend now pay later.
It is that this debt based economic model that has now found its way into every layer of society from consumer, retailer, producer to government, all totally reliant upon credit, is the primary reason why a single system failure, in this case interbank lending, stopped everything dead in its tracks.
Having sold off our gold reserves, raided our pension funds  and squandered the money, there was nothing to fall back on, and we have allowed the backbone of the country, the wealth creators, the small to medium enterprise to be drowned in a sea of compliance, regulation and taxes which are crippling our ability to compete, and consequently we have a shrinking productive sector in a country that is spending ever more.
Nations, markets and individuals are stronger through diversity than homogenised cultures, regulatory systems and governments.With this in mind we must reform to ensure our money is real and that our future is built on more than just an I.O.U note to the world bank.
Real Money, not borrowings, is the core of the economy. It belongs to those to earn and spend it, the wealth creators, not merely to those who currently create money or manage it.
But that is only a beginning.
Total Reform of the monetary system, I propose Three planks – Sterling, Sovereign and Free Banking
Firstly, we will return the sovereignty of our national currency—pounds Sterling—to the Crown, removing the privilege of creating money from the private banking industry, with new Sterling being created, debt-free, by the government, and thence spent into the broader economy. The amount of Sterling in circulation will be prevented from being expanded through FRB, stopping bank generated inflationary spirals developing, and keeping the value of your savings safe.
Secondly, we will create a new currency, pounds Sovereign, to be 100% backed by gold. Still vital for international trade, a gold-backed currency will be immensely strong, and help protect the UK from the storms and squalls that sometimes rip through international markets. This kind of currency will also attract investment from overseas into the UK.
Thirdly, allow for the creation of free banks. Free Banks would be completely free of any government interference or regulation. If these prove popular with the market—the citizens of our nation—they will grow and prosper, choosing to embrace FRB if it wished with their own currencies (HSBC peso or Natwest dollars) possibly supplanting Sterling as the primary means of exchange on a day-to-day basis. However, and should they fail, such failure will not impact on anyone who chooses to keep their banking facilities purely denominated in pounds Sterling. In this way a genuine free market in banking will be able to be tried, without the risks being spread over the general population, or the nation as a whole.
I believe that the proposals outlined above are sound and necessary. Our existing banking system has been creaking from one crisis to the next over many years, and has only remained unchallenged because of the enormous influence that those who most benefit from it—the private bankers—wield over our elected politicians.
I am happy that some of the Libertarian Party policies outlined in our manifesto (http://lpuk.org/pages/manifesto.php) are beginning to find traction in Westminster, and that my contribution reaffirmed the consensus view with those voices who shared this platform with me yesterday.

Tuesday, 7 July 2009

Press Release 7th July 2009


Libertarian Party fields
youngest ever parliamentary candidate
at Norwich North

Thomas Burridge, aged 18, is the Libertarian Party candidate for the upcoming Norwich North by-election, and is set to make history as the youngest person ever to contest a Westminster seat. Thomas was accepted officially by the Returning Officer today.

Thomas is aware that his age may raise a few eyebrows. "People may ask what can I possibly know about anything at my age? Well, one thing I do know is that Labour excesses have left my generation with a massive debt that will take generations to pay off." "It's all the more painful because we were not given any say in the decisions that have forced us to spend the rest of our lives in debt."

Currently, the Tories and Labour are squabbling about cutting state spending by a pathetic 5 per cent. Whereas, the Libertarian Party want to scrap the whole rotten system. A system that has given us high personal taxes, squalid services and a corrupt parliament." "I may not win this time, but I will be back in five years, and in another five years, if necessary. By which time, the guilty ones will be wallowing in their generous pensions – while my generation – The Debt Generation – will still be paying back the money that was squandered."

The Libertarian Party believes in individual liberty, personal responsibility and freedom from government. Its most prominent policy is to scrap income tax, and transfer taxes to non-essential goods, leaving items such as food, heating and rent tax-free.


For more information, or to arrange an interview, contact the Libertarian Party Norwich North Campaign Office on 01603 850573 or the media enquiries mobile on 07505 228618  or email  media@lpuk.org

Further details are available on our campaign website: http://www.thomasburridge.com
Alternatively, visit the Libertarian Party website: http://www.lpuk.org



Monday, 20 April 2009

LPUK grows up - getting ready for elections

On the 1st of January 2009, the Libertarian Party celebrated its first Birthday. From its inception at the beginning of 2008 support for the Libertarian ideals laid out in our manifesto has been steadily growing, and today we have taken the first major steps from that single national structure into regional Branch formations.

We have formally launched the South East Branch this morning, to add to the one we have in the North West, and new Branches throughout the country will soon follow, as will the names and details of our first PPC's and Local Election Candidates, which will continually be updated as new candidates are taken through our selection process.

As this country slips further into Authoritarian rule the support for Libertarian ideals has never been stronger, or more vocal.

However, as people who are coming to LPUK are telling us in no uncertain terms, the Conservative Party has no room for Libertarian thought, Cameron has made clear that he will be continuing on the present path to a Federal Europe and will not be walking with Libertarians , Osborne is providing more Keynesian economics, and William Hague has refused to commit to a referendum if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified. In other words, more of the same under a disguised 'nudge'.

Those who have come to us from the LibDems tell of horrific infighting, with the SDP controlled leadership squeezing the Liberal element out of the party, marginalising them at branch level and suggesting that there is no room in the modern LibDem party for them. The LibDems have lost their Liberal roots and become the Social Democratic party, set to continue where Brown leaves off. More of the same.

Both LibDems and Conservatives are on a collision course with the British people, 57% of whom have now indicated that they no longer wish to remain in the EU. They are looking for a genuinely free society, services that work, lower taxes, much smaller government, less nannying and laws that are Made in Britain.

The voters of Britain are not stupid people, they are not happy about being led on the road to Authoritarian rule, and they are more than aware that the Libertarian Party is the only party that offers a direct rebut to the path we are currently on.

Like all political parties the Libertarian Party relies on donations to keep it going. We urge you to make generous contributions to allow us to continue to mount the challenge, to provide the voters of Britain a voice for Liberty against this backdrop of Authoritarian politics.

To those who continue to spin the State line that we are still a free country, I would suggest a quick review of the facts that would tell you otherwise.

Iain Dale published Damian Green's wife's top ten tips on what to do if your home is being searched by the Police. How has it come to pass that we now consider this an every day event?

How has it come to pass that we consider the list below every day events?

Ballot Boxes are interfered with
Voting registers go missing
The Police can kill innocent people and get away with it
You can be put in prison for 42 days on pure suspicion
You can be put in prison indefinitely on the word of a politician
The State can torture people
Your children are monitored at School by Political Officers

Your children's fingerprints are taken without your consent by willing teachers
Their behaviour is logged on a State database for their entire lives
Your innocent fingerprints, iris scans and biometrics are held by the State
You do not have the right to remain silent
You are watched on 4 million CCTV cameras
You may not photograph the Police

The media is controlled by the State
You do not have the right to protest peacefully
Curfews exist for entire communities
Your travel movements are logged and monitored
Who you vote for is logged and monitored
Your shopping habits are studied and logged by the State
Your emails and telephone conversations are recorded by the State

Your Bank and financial detailed are accessed by the State
Your passport can be withdrawn at the whim of the State
Government agencies can use lie detector tests on you.

List of life in the UK from Old Holborn.

Is this how a free country works?

If like me you think the answer is No, then join the Libertarian Party, help us to work to give you those lost freedoms back.

If you want to make a donation to LPUK so we can continue to stand for your rights, and I will be very honest here, yes, we need your money, click here

If you want to stand at Local Elections or as a Member of Parliament yourself to make that difference, then email us at contact@lpuk.org.

No, we don't have all the answers, anyone who tells you that they do is lying, but we believe that we are putting forward far more credible options than the Conservatives or the LibDems.

The world is a very fluid place at the moment, there is an air of uncertainty over Economics, military posturing, the real threats of terrorism, energy security, food security and much more as governments around the world are forcing us into Global governence, Global financial control, unelected european control.

We are looking for your help to get the LPUK ready for the Local Elections and then General Elections, we intend standing, we intend fighting this battle at the ballot box, for we are no longer prepared to stand by and watch our Country destroyed from the inside out.

n.b. LPUK will not be standing in the European Elections. Until the people of Britain have made a decision on EU political union through a referendum, we consider that the European Parliament is not a legal institution and we shall not provide it false respectability.


Wednesday, 15 April 2009

Across Europe little interest in EU elections

There appears to be little interest in the EU elections, not only here in the UK but right across the European empire. It seems that people will be rejecting the validity of the EU and voting with their feet and going to the pub instead of the polling booths.

Only 34 percent of the 500 million European Union citizens say they will vote in the European parliament elections on June 4-7, a survey suggests.

Belgians topped the list with 70 percent saying they would probably vote, while Poles were at the bottom with just 13 percent, according to the Eurobarometer poll. The figure for Belgium was still low though, considering the EU is the largest employer in Belgium and the country has compulsory voting with people who fail to turn up to polling booths risking a fine.

In the Netherlands, 39 percent of those eligible to vote turned out in 2004. However, in June of 2006, 63 percent voted in a referendum on the European constitution, which was then rejected by 61.6 percent of Dutch voters.

The only time that voters have come out in strength in any EU member state has been to reject the Constitution at a time when referendums were still allowed.

In Britain, 30 percent of respondents said they would definitely not vote - far more than in other EU member state.

In the June elections, 750 members of the European parliament will be elected by proportional representation to represent some 500 million EU citizens.

The vote is being billed by the EU as the largest trans-national election in history, the reality however will be that it is likely to be the largest trans-national failure in history.

The Libertarian Party will not be standing any candidates in the EU parliamentary elections, it will not give that validity to imposed political union without a referendum of the British people.

If you would like to support the Libertarian Party by donating to its UK General Election fund, please write to us at donate@lpuk.org, or use the Donate button in the sidebar.

Sunday, 5 April 2009

Civil Disobedience protest at Data Retention of email

From Monday All your emails, web browsing history and mobile calls will be stored for a year due to sweeping new laws making Britain a proper kleptocracy, by order of the EU.

(On 15 March 2006 the European Union formally adopted Directive 2006/24/EC, on "the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC")

Your web browsing will be stored from your ISP. The Government will force you to have it all revealed to them from your ISP. IP addresses the works.

Story in the Independent here

As a personal protest, I have created the following email signature, which will be added to each and every email that I send. I see this as a completely responsible act, one which does not break the law, but none-the-less an act of defiance, an act of rebellion against those who would take away my right to privacy, supposedly guaranteed by the European Charter of Human Rights, one which I hope will make those who draft such inept laws pay attention.

The following is a disclaimer and a protest at the collection, retention and sharing of my personal mail by the morally bankrupt state.
By adding a string of key words, it will guarantee that each and every mail that I send will now need to be manually viewed as it is picked up by the auto scan software. If every person in the UK does exactly the same, then the entire system will quickly become so unmanageable, so unwieldy that it will become unworkable.

Key words, bomb, assassinate, president, brown, Osama, Obama, Sargozy, Merkel, government, target, location, rocket, grenade, al-Qaeda, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, UK, America, guns, jets, bombs, machine-gun, terrorists, MP's, pigs, troughs, France, Germany, Italy, nuclear, Korea.

It is time to stop meekly accepting everything that the government throws at us. It is time to stop listening to lily livered politicians who say this is OK, because it really is NOT OK. It is time to stop listening to the apologist organisations or committees who will accept this type of data collection with a rider of wanting a little more protection for the data.

I refuse to be intimidated by my own Government. It is time to make this kind of data collection unworkable. 

Now Government, make me stop !!

p.s. My car is perfectly serviced, I never go walking in the woods alone, and I have no intention of doing anything stupid. (for the record). I have also checked the wording of my ISP agreement, which does not include any reference to the use of keywords.

Thursday, 19 March 2009

The EU's power is easy to miss

Perhaps something that people who are considering voting in the EU elections in June should consider.

Europe's power is easy to miss. Like an 'invisible hand', it operates through the shell of traditional political structures.

The British House of Commons, British law courts, and British civil servants are still here, but they have all become agents of the European Union implementing European law.
This is no accident. By creating common standards that are implemented through national institutions, Europe can take over countries without necessarily becoming a target for hostility… Europe's invisibility allows it to spread its influence without provocation.
- Pro-euro author Mark Leonard

The quotation above might sound like something out of a theory. But Mark Leonard – a passionate advocate of deeper integration - makes an astute observation.

That is why Labour, Conservative nor LibDem will not discuss the EU in the debating chamber, nor in Newspapers or the Internet. We all know its there, but non shall speak its name. Keep the people ignorant of this all pervading hegemony until it is too late for them to do anything about it is the agenda of the ruling elite.

Again I ask the question: What riches have been promised that our MP's act like traitorous thieves in the night.

The Libertarian Party however will speak its name, and continue to warn of the dangers of this ever so slow slide into an unelected post democratic EU empire.

Last week I warned of those who would attempt to trick the British public into believing that they can swap real party led democracy for a post democratic era, yet pretend that this was real democracy in action.

The kind of politics that Jury Team are presenting is clearly the next step in the EUropeanisation of the UK. They have pretty much destroyed our National identity, they have worked well to destroy the national will and fabric of our heritage, and now they will destroy our ability to speak out, to challenge, to defy, to oppose through government by destroying the Party Political system.

Jury Team are there to further the interests of the EU, to neuter any coherent challenge to the working of the unelected in Brussels who would rule us, and the words of EU president José Manuel Barroso make abundantly clear who rules in Europe.

"It is the main political parties and the main political families that really shape the European agenda... Of course these are the most influential families in Europe."

Not me, not you, not our elected representatives, but the most influential families in Europe. The voice of Independents would be blown away in the wind, yet this is the EU that the LibDem's and Conservatives are committed to.

The future of Britain should not be decided by influential families, or by political parties who would collude with them, this is not democracy in any way shape or form. Beware those who would have you believe otherwise.

The Libertarian Party will not be participating in the EU elections, we believe them to be a sham, an elected house of those who are there merely to rubber stamp the decisions made by these influential families, to give the impression of democracy.

The EU parliament cannot make law, only approve that which is already written and laid before them by the EU Commission, which now accounts for over 80% of new laws in Britain.

The Libertarian Party is committed to pulling Britain out of the EU, a position that the British people clearly want, to develop a future outside of the influence of these empire builders, to develop a future for the British people in the best interests of the British people, free from Authoritarian rule.

The LPUK Manifesto is a manifesto for Britain, for the people of Britain, and for the British people to decide their own future. The Libertarian Party is committed to reassert the primacy of our Bill of Rights and Common Law system over the Napoleonic system that has encroached from the continent in recent years.

Sunday, 8 March 2009

Jury Team - The Verdict

Today sees the launch via the Times of a new concept in politics. No Parties, No policies, just lots of 'Independent' MP's and MEP's.

The Jury Team, as it is to be known, is the brainchild of former Tory grandee and captain of industry Sir Paul Judge. He has written a book, 'The End of the Party', railing against the abuse of democracy and government by the partisan system.

The concept is an interesting one, lots of independents representing the people rather than a Party. So what exactly will these 'Independents' be representing, themselves or the wishes of their constituents?.

Those who vote for them will know that 1 individual at least has put up a platform, but 1 out of many hundreds of other independents who may have, or probably will have other interests, will have put up a completely different platforms. I am afraid that 1 MP or MEP will never be heard, will never change anything, will never have an impact on, anything.

We know within the Libertarian Party, and I suggest that it is no different in other Parties, that to coalesce thoughts and ideas into policies that can be presented to the electorate is a difficult path. With so many strands of Libertarianism it has been likened to herding cats, but we have managed to put together a manifesto that reflects good Libertarian principled values, and we can speak with one voice in explaining those values.

Jury Team tell us that beyond signing up to the sleaze busting, "our candidates pick their own policies and would be completely un-whipped". So what exactly would voters be voting for?.

Have we grown so used to government lacking policy ideas that we want to create just that on purpose?. Looking at Westminster, 646 Independent MP's means 646 different ideas on how a country should be governed, but then maybe that's the idea. Divide and Rule is very EU.

Surely this is the dawn of post democratic Britain, a communitarian dream, and to leave it totally open to 646 MP's who don't have a clue where they are going beyond transparency is a recipe for sheer chaos, vested interests and corruption.

I could not support someone who didn't know where they were going, could not tell me why, but only wanted to let me know that when they got there, wherever that may be, they would like to let me know they did so honestly.

Their initial stance of cleaning up sleaze, making politicians more accountable, making the system more directly democratic, and trying to make government more transparent, are all policies to be found in the Libertarian Manifesto, and whilst for Jury Team this is very admirable, then what? This is surely the same problem that UKIP has always had, out of Europe, then what?

After cleaning up Westminster, do they just sit around twiddling their thumbs? Waiting for the EU to tell them to rubber stamp some more legislation, providing the now leaderless, rudderless British with a continual stream of ever more regulation, ever more costly solutions to problems that don't exist, that lines the pockets of the vested interests of those who have lobbied the EU Commission for the next set of rules. Whatever the EU commission wants, it will get. I will let Gunter Verheugen, Vice-President of the European Commission explain.

The kind of politics that Jury Team are presenting is clearly the next step in the EUropeanisation of the UK. They have pretty much destroyed our National identity, they have worked well to destroy the national will and fabric of our heritage, and now they will destroy our ability to speak out, to challenge, to defy, to oppose through government by destroying the Party Political system.

Is this to be the future, powerless individual figures who will, because they do not have that strength of unity or purpose, merely have to enact whatever is put before them.

Without a purpose, without a coherent vision that the voting public can debate and support, and without a single collective voice these 'Independents' may just as well take a fishing boat into the North Sea and shout the odds in every direction from afar, because no-one in Europe will be listening.

MP's following party policies you can vote in, and you can vote them out again if you don't like how they govern, but the EU you can never vote out.

It should be remembered that within the EU it is the EU Commission that draws up legislation, not the EU parliament. Even with the strongest of Party blocs in the EU parliament it is difficult to oppose and debate to raise amendments, but without that Party system, without policies that guide that Party and the governance that they represent, you are no longer governed at all, you are ruled.

Yes, it is an interesting concept, but a concept that is founded in Communitarianism, a concept that means you will lose your freedom to choose the way that Britain is governed in the way you want it governed, this is a concept that is to surrender to the will of the EU forever.

Sir Paul Judge tells us:
We need to make our democracy more open, our politicians more accountable, and our government more transparent. That won't happen as long as the party oligarchies retain a stranglehold on our democratic choices.

Yes Sir Paul, we do need to make our democracy more open, yes our politicians need to be more accountable, but surrendering our ability to protect our democratic choices to the EU is not the way to do it.

Thursday, 26 February 2009

Chris Huhne's 'Freedom Bill' is merely tinkering

It seems that we are to write yet again on this blog about the enigma that is Chris Huhne. Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrats, we challenged him last week to change the name of his party to the SDP to better reflect his illiberal views after he publicly backed the Home Secretary in banning from the UK an elected member of the Dutch Parliament, Gert Wilders.
Now we see that in a show of publicity, he is back in the news launching what he calls his 'Freedom Bill'.
Where do we begin to look at Mr Huhne's efforts, which on the face of it are a step in the right direction, which LPUK applaud, however, and with the LibDem's there is always an however...
I read the 'Freedom Bill' that was published on the LibDem site, then I re-read it because I thought that their published version was only a précis, but no, there it was in its entirety. Not once, not a single time does it mention the word Liberty.
This is not repeal being presented by Huhne, this is not winding back the injustice, this is just tinkering for political gain.
That indeed then prompted me to post the following comment on the presentation site: (which at the time of writing this post was still in moderation).

A start yes, however, simply removing 1 or 2 clauses in a number of Acts does nothing to remove the underlying evil behind much of this primary legislation, and can easily be put back in by a subsequent government.

I fear that this is merely window dressing in order to catch media and voter attention rather than a genuine Liberal attempt at restoring the Liberties to the UK population.

It is noted that it does not once use the words Liberty or Liberties, but Freedom. A strange choice of wording or perhaps not, as we know full well that the Acts will never be allowed to be repealed by the EU, of which your party is so fully supportive.

One item that I found both annoying and amusing was that it was so clearly obvious that the copy of 1984 that Chris Huhne received from the Libertarian Party had struck home. It had found its target as we had intended, as he used the very phrase that we placed on each book in his press briefing, when he said "George Orwell's 1984 was a warning, not a blueprint".
I suppose we should be flattered at the impact of the 1984 campaign, but the way in which Huhne is exploiting that targeting by delivering such a poorly constructed Bill just reinforces my view of him as a mercenary with statist ambitions.
My posting on the LPUK blog last week indicating that the Libertarian Party are leading the debate was spot on, definitely on the money. It is clear that Huhne is only FOLLOWING, but he is playing to the crowd with this gimmick bill, as he knows full well that he will not be able to implement one jot of it without also undertaking to leave the EU.

The EU will block every single item in Huhne's bill. I will reiterate again for the avoidance of doubt, the LibDems, or any other party, will not be allowed to undertake the repeal of liberty stripping laws whilst they support the EU.
Nearly every clause that Huhne was to remove through this Bill are included in the original Acts because they are fulfilling EU Directives. The only clauses that I am certain did not eminate from the EU is sections 132 to 138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (c. 15) (which regulate demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament) which were only added to the Act in a vain attempt to silence Brian Haw.

At this point I am happy to boast that The Libertarian Party is the ONLY party to promise to undertake both the full repeal of such liberty stripping laws, and to extract the UK from the EU.
Moving on, several things have also crossed my mind at the timing by Chris Huhne of this particular proposal. Firstly we know that the Convention on Modern Liberty is on in London, so Mr Huhne obviously wants to present the LibDem's as a party that is 'doing something'. This only serves to hoodwink the voters who are starved by Government and the media of any general knowledge of the EU and how far it now has its tenticles into the UK and its government.
Secondly, the recent civil war going on within the party over Liberal Vision has reached a stage where they are losing members, so this is a sop to try to win back those disaffected members with strong Libertarian views, and prevent them from abandoning what is essentially a very social democratic party where their views are neither heard nor acted upon, and he desperately needs to repair the damage he caused to himself over the Gert Wilders affair.
Lastly, it is an attempt at one-upmanship. David Davis will be the politician carrying the Keynote speech of note at the Convention on Modern Liberty, therefore Huhne wants to grab the media attention to water down whatever it is that Davis will be delivering.
Overall, whilst I would have hoped that the right intentions were there in the presentation of this Bill, I cannot see it. It delivers far too little, it is much too late to be merely tinkering, and provides no more safeguards on the Liberties of the population of this country than the current Government have deprived us of.
If this is the best attempt by those perporting to be Liberal at 'Modern Liberty', if this is the very best that is likely to come out of that Convention, then this nation still has much to fear for its future.

Wednesday, 25 February 2009

Can you spot the errors in this picture?

Ok, so this isn't actually a picture, but I'll give you a few moments.

Finished? Let's see how you got on.

Number one;

Michelle Keiller was shocked to receive a £120 fine with a picture of a white van bearing her Toyota estate car's registration number illegally parked in south-east London.

Now she has to prove her innocence or pay up.

Number two

Now she needs to send identification – and her car registration documents – to Lambeth Council, to prove that she does not own the van bearing her registration number.

(duplicate omitted there, obviously)

The DVLA said: "Vehicle cloning is something we've come across in the past, it's not as widespread as you think but is something that does happen.

which is in combination with something earlier in the article;

Michelle Keiller was shocked to receive a £120 fine with a picture of a white van bearing her Toyota estate car's registration number illegally parked in south-east London.

To recap;

  • In the good old days (let us say 20 years ago, and for scores of years before that) the state had to prove guilt rather than the individual having to prove their innocence.
  • As the issue here is regarding the accuracy of a recorded registration mark, i.e.is it a van or a car, why is the state demanding other documentation, such as ID? If XX123XXX is a car not a van, who gives a monkeys who owns what?
  • If the state is aware of this cloning, why are they providing the details of a Toyota estate car to a third party when requesting the details of a white van?

Don't worry, folks. ID cards, DNA databases, Phone and Email details databases, Foreign travel databases. You have nothing to fear.

Tuesday, 20 January 2009

Campaign for expenses transparency

The Libertarian Party has launched a campaign to ask your local MP to follow the lead of Douglas Carswell and undertake to publish full details of their expenses claims, despite the government trying to brush this under the carpet by exempting them from the freedom of information act.

I have contacted my local MP, and await his response. One wonders if it will be as arrogant as Nottingham South MP Alan Simpson, who was quoted as saying;

Nottingham South MP Alan Simpson favoured changes but said: "If we are going to demand that MPs expenses be published in minute detail then so should everyone's, even the private sector's."

Er, Alan, I am not forced to pay the expenses of those in the private sector, as I enter into contracts with them voluntarily. However, if I don't pay my taxes, I am banged up. So I have every right to know how you spend my money you appalling toad.

Saturday, 17 January 2009

Libertarians announce candidate

As a political party, the Libertarian Party UK is very young having only been formed a year ago. We have much fewer members than other parties but our membership is growing steadily, day by day. We have a manifesto, office holders and a strong internet presence so now is the time to step up to the plate and announce candidates for elections.

I, Andrew Hunt, therefore declare my candidacy for the Wisbech South ward of Cambridgeshire county council and the North East Cambridgeshire parliamentary constituency.

Lets look at Wisbech South first. The election will take place on the 4th June and coincide with the EU election. I expect the turnout will be low, probably around 35%. The currant occupant is a conservative who got 50% of the vote last time, the area generally is pretty tory leaning. Indeed, at the last district council elections the tories got in unopposed. NE Cambs also has a conservative majority of about 9,000.

But lets not kid ourselves, there is a lot of anger about, people will not be voting for the tories, they will be voting against labour.

Our message is therefore powerful. Yougov polls clearly indicate that about 75% see taxation as far too high and the "state" as far too interfering and meddlesome. We are the only party that gives the electorate what they want. The fact that we can go out there and declare the abolition of Income Tax (whilst still keeping the NHS, pensions, education to 18, dole money, police, armed forces, etc) gives us an immense boost.

I am not saying we will sweep to victory, but I urge other libertarians to step up to the plate and join me in announcing their contesting other seats. Lets go out, canvass and leaflet, and let the voters know they have a real alternative to the authoritarian lab/con/libdim rubbish.

For more on me, see my personal blog:-


For the UK Libertarian Party blog see:-


Nottingham's housing scandal

In a story that would make Soviet Russia proud, there is a scandal brewing here in Nottingham that beggars belief.

Its report says employees of the housing service, as well as relatives, partners and associates were given houses they should not have had.

Tens of thousands of pounds of public money was spent improving wrongly allocated houses – and some were then bought under the right-to-buy scheme and a councillor lied to help two associates obtain a house.

Got that? So these housing officers were giving out council housing to their family and mates, even though they weren’t eligible. They were then spending huge sums on improving some of these houses (I have seen over £40,000 quoted in one case), and the houses were then purchased under the right to buy scheme. Some of them were then sold.

But as if that wasn’t bad enough, it now emerges that they were dishing out jobs to their mates at the same time.


No councilors have seen fit to fall on their swords.

This sorry tale is an excellent example of how giving the state power over individuals, in this case, over housing, will always end in tears. 'Social' housing, or housing for those less fortunate in society is to important to be left to a corruptible, inefficient state.

Tuesday, 13 January 2009

That isn't how it works

There is, perhaps, little more dangerous than a Labour politician who doesn't understand economics being in charge of economic policy. Presumably buoyed up by the congestion charge defeat in the Manchester election, campaigners have made a demand for a local referendum in Nottingham over the workplace parking levy. Ignoring for a moment that one should always be suspicious of a tax that dare not speak it's name, the fight appears to be over who will pay the charge. The campaigners say the employees, the council say the business community. In fact, so convinced by the 'rightness' of the tax, Coun Urquhart makes some pretty astonishing claims;

"During the current economic climate, it is more important than ever to help stimulate economic growth. The WPL package will play a key role in attracting new businesses to Nottingham and securing a bright and sustainable future for the city."

So, let us look at the economics of the tax.

1) The employer pays the tax.

Assuming that the employer isn't a monopoly , the employer in question will have to compete with other companies who may well not pay such a tax. Thus, he cannot pass the cost on to his customers, as they will simply go elsewhere. As he has a duty to his shareholders to maximise profits, less they invest in his competitors, he will therefore have to cut costs. Thus, he is likely to either relocate or lay off staff

2) The employer passes the tax onto the employee

In this scenario, those who travel into the city, who have highly skilled, transferable careers will be tempted to cut their tax bill by several hundred pounds by simply working in any one of the other employment centres in the East Midlands. Those who are not in such demand, and who cannot either relocate or demand higher wages (which causes the same problems as the scenario above) will simply aim to transfer to jobs where they can use public transport. Those outside of the 'improved' public transport areas will be tempted into their cars, but not to travel into the city, but to it's outskirts. Thus, employers have another incentive to move from the city ~ to attract staff at lower wages, or to avoid paying the public transport rent premium.

As you can imagine, it doesn't take a huge amount of imagination to realise that this could be self defeating from a revenue point of view as fas as the local economy is concerned, as business and people regard Nottingham City as a less attractive place to live and do business. One thing is sure however ~ if the city does become an economic ghost town, traffic levels will reduce, so the tax will have it's intended effect in that regard.

To counter this, the tax advocates may well argue that any effect will be minimal, as the charge will be so small. But then it won't tempt people out of their cars, so it really does just become a revenue raising scheme for a council with a fondness for spending your money for you.

Saturday, 3 January 2009

Secret LibLab coalition government being discussed

Have the LibDems taken leave of their senses? Is their leadership stark raving mad?

Peter Oborne reports today that secret talks have already begun between Labour and Liberal Democrat figures about a possible coalition. He reports that as a sweetener to any possible deal the Labour Whips office is already drumming up support for Ming Campbell as the next Speaker.

Are certain senior LibDem members so bent on attaining power that they can seriously be considering a pact with the most authoritarian government this country has ever seen?.

Oborne points to an article by Vince Cable suggesting that a national government might not be a bad idea and says:

"Throughout all my years of reporting politics I have rarely encountered such a blatant hint by a senior politician from an opposition party that he wants a job in government  -  and all the signs are that Gordon Brown is warming to the idea of Vince Cable as Chancellor of the Exchequer in a government of national unity.

However, the position of Nick Clegg (Cable's boss) is much less clear. I understand that Vince Cable's public musings about a coalition government were emphatically not sanctioned in advance by his leader. Furthermore, insiders speak of a growing split inside the Liberal Democrats over the issue."

It is apparently Cable and Ming Campbell, who are pushing for this deal. If Clegg were to go along with it, I suspect he would split his party.

Can the Libertarian wing of the LibDems honestly feel that they could back such a move by the power hungry Cable. I can see the logic in promoting Campbell to the role of speaker, but Cable as Chancellor?

However, there is a younger generation of LibDems who are very hostile to this idea of a coalition with Labour. As a result, Nick Clegg faces a very difficult few months.

As Oborne points out those in favour of an "arrangement" within the Lib Dems are "on the whole, the older and more Left-leaning members of the party."

The Libertarian Party (LPUK) is ready to open its doors to those Libertarian minded LibDem members who finally realise that there is no room for them and reform of the LibDems is impossible.

Meanwhile, Gordon Brown, who is being closely advised on this matter by Peter Mandelson, is not only contemplating a grand coalition in the event of a hung parliament after the next election, but Brown is also ready to consider heading a national government in the coming months in the event of the economic situation getting worse.

Indeed, as the financial crisis deteriorates, this momentous decision may come sooner than he expects, but a Churchill he is not. (we understand what all the Churchillian propaganda was for!)

Beware the Ides of March. There is much political intrigue afoot.

Hattip Coffee House