Having spent most of my political life 'on the fringe', including my time in the Tory Party when I was on the libertarian wing, I've spent much of my time pondering why 'the breakthrough' has never come. My membership of the Tory Party was lukewarm and not very active from around 1994, but prior to that I had been a candidate, agent, branch chairman etc., etc.
From around 2000 I have been a parliamentary candidate, local councillor, regional organiser and office holder and so on, first in UKIP then the Libertarian Party. But 'the breakthrough' never came. Is it because people in the UK are fanatically pro-EU? Numerous surveys and polls suggest they are not. Is it because people in the UK eschew the prospect of reasonable immigration control? Numerous surveys and polls suggest they are not. Is it because they are happy to see government get bigger and ever more controlling while increasing our taxes to pay for it? Numerous surveys and polls suggest they are not. I could go on and on and on.
But still people vote Labour or Tory. OK, they used to vote Lib Dem too, but that was until you had people like Cable and Huhne in government and we saw what they are really like. So why do people stick to the old parties rather than voting for what they believe? By 'what they believe' I mean alternative parties of whatever hue, although I am going to talk from my experience, which is on the libertarian wing of politics.
The first reason is that the establishment have stitched up politics. If nothing else the Murdoch affair has shown how closed and incestuous the establishment is with police, media and politicians scratching each others backs at best, often seeming to be doing worse. It appears that government, the media and powerful figures at the top of the establishment are a closed shop, working for the benefit of each other with us, the populace, piggy in the middle providing, through our taxes, the resources for them to do what the hell they want. They listen in to telephone conversations, they spy on us and read our emails and that's just 'our' government!
Then, when people kick against what we have governing us they close ranks and accuse those offering an alternative of lunacy or phobia. Don't like the EU? Europhobe. Don't like unlimited/mass immigration? Racist, and so on. The silent majority are silenced because they fear being branded a 'phobic', an extremist or some other 'ist'. They might lose their jobs. They may find themselves in court charged with a 'hate crime'. Has anybody ever committed a 'love crime'?
If you question the effectiveness of a nationalised healthcare system you are accused of being an evil capitalist bastard who would rather people die than fund proper healthcare. The fact that nationalised healthcare means the idiot politicians we all know to be untrustworthy, some have even been found guilty of being on the fiddle and have been put away, are in charge of our healthcare seems to be ignored. Advocate an alternative to the NHS and you are callous and wicked. We've been stitched up.
So the silent majority have been coerced into remaining silent. What of those who break ranks and get together to form pressure groups or new political parties?
It isn't encouraging. I increasingly fear that what the establishment have done is ensure that those who organise outside the main two political parties are dragged down by lunatics. I don't say it was necessarily intentional, more a useful side effect of their tactic of political correctness to put it the more accurate way.
Pressure groups can often survive reasonably well as they are there to influence, usually the party in power and/or the one likely to gain power at the next election. They often have members who are experienced in mainstream politics who tend to moderate the more extreme elements often attracted to single issue causes. Some, no matter how loony, just keep banging on and on thinking people care but rarely noticing that people don't. They are relatively harmless in most cases.
The real danger is in the growth of new political parties. These are often founded by obsessives who grow tired of being part of a pressure group, UKIP and the Green Party to name two, and decide to go for full party status. Like these two parties, many never manage to shake off the tag of being 'single issue parties' and achieve a little success, but not a lot. I suppose the old Liberal Party and Social Democrat Party merging to become the Lib Dems is the most successful example. But those two did begin with some representation in parliament.
The authoritarian right in the form of the BNP have seen limited success in the form of councillors and MEPs. But they have now imploded and lost most of their council seats. Like the Lib Dems in Coalition, when the nutters get a glimpse of power they are shown to be totally inadequate and disappear in a cloud of acrimony and infighting, or are thrown out the first opportunity the electorate get.
The sad thing about this process is that those decent, upstanding people with genuine concerns get involved with smaller parties only to be driven out by the obsessives and the loonies. Either that or they are driven out by the constant bickering and infighting of the obsessives and loonies. It is a sad fact of life, and there are examples throughout recent history, of groups on the left and the right coming together as a political movement only to end in acrimony and even hatred. When they do split amid acrimony the hatred displayed by previous allies to each other, far outweighs their dislike for their political opponents. This has been made even worse with the advent of the internet, now the whole world can witness what recently went on behind closed doors.
The latest example of this particularly unpleasant and nasty form of fratricide is evident with the demise of the Libertarian Party in this country. I was a member briefly and spent a year as Party Chairman. My membership lapsed last year as I grew increasingly disillusioned with the eccentricity, if not downright lunacy of certain elements within the party. This culminated in its implosion a few months ago and as a brand is now probably so tarnished that it will be years before a party called the Libertarian Party will ever stand a chance of gaining even limited credibility in the UK. It brings me no pleasure to be proved correct in my analysis last year.
The problem is that on the political fringe, and to an extent the mainstream, there is always an element who prefer to wash their dirty linen in public. In many cases this means they can grandstand and show how much more idealogically pure they are than others. In most cases it's a huge exercise in egotism and self-obsession, even if it is to the detriment of the cause they claim to support. The death of the Libertarian Party is recorded in gory detail all over the internet for all the world to see. I don't intend going into it here.
One thing I do know, is that those working hard behind the scenes to resurrect the Libertarian Party, and I wish them well but fear they are doomed to failure, are the ones you will not see bickering and spitting venom on internet forums and blogs. Those who do that tend to be the obsessive destructive types I have mentioned before, who seem to be driven by hatred and vindictiveness. In every registered political party in the UK there are mechanisms for dealing with those who do wrong without very publicly wrecking a party. But it's often easier, and better for attracting fame/notoriety/higher blog readership, to do it the tabloid way.
And let's face it, those on the lunatic fringe get a real buzz from being the centre of attention, regardless of the effect on the cause they claim to espouse.
The work of the establishment done, yet again!
Showing posts with label Libertarian Party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Libertarian Party. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Wednesday, December 08, 2010
Guest Post: Andrew Withers-Libertarian Party Leader
First off what is my kind of Libertarianism ?
It is one founded on everybody having the right to personal liberty of thought,word and deed, but that is absolutely coupled with the personal responsibility for those thoughts, words and deeds.
Fabianism the doctrine that 'the state is a force for good' and is the absolute converse of Libertarian philosophy. By 'paying' the State with no oversight on how that money is spent by the individual, my gut feeling is that the 'donor' feels relieved of any further responsibility to our fellow human beings, and the recipient also feels no sense of responsibility to the donor and it creates a feeling of entitlement and of rights that have to be paid by others.
Fabianism also creates a class of people that 'administers' the system. The model that they choose to perpetuate is that of 1950's rigid bureaucratic socialism.
So the first thing I want to achieve is an acceptance of the message. Libertarianism is not a scabrous right wing philosophy, Libertarianism rejects all forms of 'authority' that do not have checks and balances against it, be it 'Left' or 'Right'.
Various parties have adopted 'libertarianism' (including Hattersley for the Labour Party) and it has become a fairly vague term, a bit like 'liberal'. When the reality of their idea of 'libertarianism' is somewhat different to true Libertarianism, usually authoritarian and pro-big State.
Secondly, I want to forge links and understanding with all organisations that profess Classic Liberal Values. The Libertarian Alliance, The Cobden Centre, The Adam Smith Institute etc., and members in other parties who are sympathetic.
Thirdly I want to create an efficient party machine with a central office, that can attract members, dispense information and as a source for obtaining books associated with Libertarianism. This is an issue that cannot be ducked, our poor organisation.
Fourthly we have to be a campaigning party, because we do not get a lot of coverage, cases like the Stephen Neary case (see Anna Raccoon). Daily people are being sucked into the state system against their will. The plight of others caught in the maw of the State should and must be our concern.
The alternative is an acceptance of the 'endarkening' where liberal values are driven out and the State is the be all and end of our existence.
It is a case of standing up and being counted. We now have another opportunity in Oldham, where we have a very good candidate in Gregg Beaman.
If you have any questions for Andrew then please feel free to ask via comments on this blog. Alternatively you can contact Andrew via his blog, looking for a voice.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Libertarian Party AGM
You might like to visit Andrew's blog, Looking for a Voice. I'm looking forward to working with Andrew and the other people elected on Saturday to fight for a worthy cause whose time has come.
The AGM also provided a great opportunity to catch up with my sister and her husband (aka Julia and Barry) who, like yours truly and Mrs B, happen to enjoy good food and wine. Delays on the M6 meant that by the time I arrived in Wood Green on Friday night we were too late to hit the West End, as planned, so stayed in for an excellent home cooked meal.
Of course the AGM was in a pub, The Punch Tavern on Fleet Street, which meant first pints of excellent foaming ale being consumed around 12 00pm. So the tradition of good company and good booze continued. Then, at 4-00pm I was round the corner to The Blackfriar to meet Julia and Barry again. Both pubs are a must if you like good ale and traditional pubs. Another pint and a catch up on the football scores, notably Brighton 1 FC United 1 and Manchester United 7 Blackburn 1, then we crossed the Thames to walk along the South Bank.
If you get the chance to visit the South Bank Centre before 5th December you must visit the World Press Photo Exhibition 2010. It's an exhibition of around 170 award winning photographs but be warned, some of them are extremely disturbing.
We then headed towards Soho via The Salisbury to the wonderful Melati Restaurant for a fantastic Indonesian/Malaysian feast.
Sunday morning saw the long drive home after a hearty breakfast of bacon and eggs, arriving back in God's county just before the heaven's dumped a couple of inches of snow on us. And just to finish the weekend properly Mrs B had prepared a fine Sunday dinner of roast beef, and we had a roaring log fire to sit by while catching up on each others weekend news while enjoying a couple of tinctures.
That's what I call a damn fine weekend, just a shame I couldn't fit in a football game at some point.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Libertarian Party v The Government-An Update
Following attempts by the Coalition to bar Andrew Withers from becoming Leader of the Libertarian Party we have taken legal advice and requested clarification from the Electoral Commision on the legality or otherwise of the government's actions. I have previously posted on this here and here.
This afternoon the following email was received from the Electoral Commission and is their considered opinion on Vince Cable's attempt to remove Andrew Withers as Leader of the Libertarian Party through the courts.
Also that it is the Electoral Commission's considered opinion that it is up a court to decide whether Andrew Withers will be the elected Leader of a registered political party, not the members, and that the Electoral Commission will approve an 'application' from the Party, not a notification from the members that a new Leader has been elected.
Freedom of association has been the bedrock of our parliamentary democracy, under the Coalition the freedom to associate will be decided by the Government.
I wonder if we'll all be arrested on Saturday for subversion when Andrew becomes Party Leader.
This afternoon the following email was received from the Electoral Commission and is their considered opinion on Vince Cable's attempt to remove Andrew Withers as Leader of the Libertarian Party through the courts.
The current proceedings taken against you is a matter for the Courts to decide.So the considered opinion of the Electoral Commission is that the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has the right to determine who shall and who shall not be the Leader or an officer of a political party.
If the party makes an application to appoint you as Leader, then we shall consider the application in accordance with PPERA taking account of any implications of the Court decision. If approved, we shall update the party's registered entry.
Also that it is the Electoral Commission's considered opinion that it is up a court to decide whether Andrew Withers will be the elected Leader of a registered political party, not the members, and that the Electoral Commission will approve an 'application' from the Party, not a notification from the members that a new Leader has been elected.
Freedom of association has been the bedrock of our parliamentary democracy, under the Coalition the freedom to associate will be decided by the Government.
I wonder if we'll all be arrested on Saturday for subversion when Andrew becomes Party Leader.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Andrew Withers, the Libertarian Party and the Police State
Following is a statement issued today by Andrew updating us on his fight with the British police state. It seems that the Tory/Lib Dem Coalition is carrying on oppressing the people of this country in much the same way as the Labour government did.
Since the arrival of the letter from Osborne Clarke Solicitors Bristol claiming to be acting on instructions from the Secretary of State Vince Cable on Friday 12th November 2009 stating his objections in the ‘ public interest’, to myself acting as Leader of the Libertarian Party or indeed any office within the party, and registering his desire that I hold no executive position in foreign companies either, it has been a busy few days.
Counsel’s initial opinion is that Vince Cable has no jurisdiction over political parties, and legal opinion in the United States where I have an ongoing representative agreement is that Vince Cable should wake up and realise that Whitehall has had no legal authority in the USA since 1780.
As has been pointed out in some very supportive emails, if Nick Griffin, Gerry Adams, and Gordon Brown, can be leaders of political parties what has brought Vince Cable to this conclusion considering I am neither racist, advocate violence or display incompetence.
This morning an email has been received from the Electoral Commission confirming that the matter is being dealt with by the Chair of the Commission Ms Jenny Watson.
A further email has been received from the office of Dr Liam Fox MP who has previously had a meeting with Ed Davey the responsible Minister in September.
Despite repeated emails chasing to set up the meeting in the last two months, the emails are now not being responded to by officials in the Department or in Ed Davey’s office.
This is an extraordinary situation, and legal advice has been to allow the Electoral Commission to establish the position under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.
As repeated I see that that the leadership of a properly consituted minor party is not for the government of the day to interfere in.This situation, a UK government minister attempting to subvert the internal structure of a small independent political party, has no place in a free and democratic country. On November 27 we will be holding our AGM in London, and I have every confidence that Andrew will be supported by the overwhelming majority of party members in his campaign to become leader. What will the Coalition government do then, arrest us all?
For more information please visit the Libertarian Party website.
Monday, November 15, 2010
The Libertarian Party and State Oppression
Below is an open letter to John Bercow written by a friend and colleague of mine, Andrew Withers. Andrew is a founder member of the Libertarian Party and is standing, unopposed, for the party leadership later this month. I have been happy to support Andrew and continue to do so despite Vince 'Big Brother' Cable's actions. The actions of the Coalition in this instance just prove why we need a libertarian party, and why the Liberal Democrats are anything but liberal:
Mr John Bercow
Speaker to the House of Commons
Dear Mr Bercow
On the 12th November 2010 the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills Dr Vince Cable MP instructed a firm of solicitors, Osborne Clarke of Bristol to write to District Judge Watson of the Bristol Registry requiring that I have leave of the Court to act as elected Leader of the Libertarian Party, further more and I quote:
‘Our client does not consider that Mr Withers has currently demonstrated sufficient need for leave in respect of the entity’
The Libertarian Party is a registered party within the meaning of the Political Parties,Elections and Referendums Act 2000, and I have a mandate from the members of the party to act as the party leader as from the 27th November, what further sufficient need do I require ?
It is extraordinary that a Minister of the Crown has made such a legal move against the leader of a minor party and creates a dangerous precedent constitutionally. Can you please advise when government ministers and the executive think that they can act in such a manner, and interfere with the internal workings of another party through the Courts.
Can you please urgently advise as Chairman of the Speakers Committee under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act, when such powers were transfered from the Electoral Commission and to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills.
I have no intention of seeking the leave of the Court to act as the leader of the Libertarian Party and I suspect this act is both illegal and ultra vires on the part of the Secretary of State. I am urgently seeking Counsels opinion on this letter.
I would be grateful for your urgent observations by return.
Yours sincerely
Andrew P Withers
Leader Designate
Libertarian Party
In the latest turn of events in Andrew's four year legal tussles with The Department of Business, Innovation & Skills, a District Judge in the Bristol Registry has ordered that he should list all of the companies and organisations that he is an executive member of so that it can be decided by the Court whether he should be given permission to continue. Amongst the organisations specifically named is the Libertarian Party.
On the 22nd September 2010, the Information Commissioner ruled that when the Department was being run by Mandelson it withheld evidence that Andrew Withers wished to rely on in Court, and that they should release it ‘without further delay’. That ruling has so far been ignored by The Secretary of State’s officials. If the order is further ignored by this Friday, Andrew Withers will be seeking a Court Order to compel the Secretary Of State to comply with the ICO order under sec7 (9) Data Protection Act 1998.
Andrew's local MP is Dr Liam Fox and has been extremely supportive in a case that he has called in a personal telephone call a ‘scandal’, and found time in the midst of the strategic defence review to have personal meeting with Ed Davey MP the responsible Minister in the coalition Government on the 27th September 2010 to discuss the case. After which Ed Davey has ordered a review into the case by senior officials and a meeting has been suggested with senior officials to try to resolve the situation.
Andrew is currently writing a book about his experiences, and admits that new chapters are being added as one man’s fight against a politicised bureaucracy continues into a fifth year.
The story started in 2006 when a French company that Andrew was a gerant (director) of was illegally placed into liquidation by its French Director in contravention of the company statuts and on a perjured statement of affairs. The Court appointed Receiver was paid 8000€ to bury the company, and the French Director made off with the assets and finished goods . An investigating French barrister appointed by Andrew Withers visited the Receiver in Coutances and noted that there were no accounts, invoices or supporting documentation. The Barrister described the situation as the worst case of corporate fraud he had seen in over forty years of practice.
The unfortunate direct consequence of this fraud was that it brought down the British company down as well and it ceased trading in 2006 unfortunately four customers and a number of corporate creditors lost money.
The company was wound up in 2007, and Andrew presented himself to the Official Receiver with supporting documentation and statements from the French Investigating Barrister as to the veracity of the illegal winding up of the company by the French Director causing the failure of the company. He was complemented on the professionalism of the presentation of the narrative and whilst he could not promise that nothing more would be heard from the Insolvency Service, he was satisfied with the narrative.
In October 2007 , Andrew became one of the five founding members of the Libertarian Party sickened by the growth of the security state established by Blair and continued by Brown and the fact that the State was out of control and the State was absorbing more and more taxpayers funds. Three days later the run on Northern Rock began.
From this point the story started to take a bizarre and disturbing twist.
■Despite the French fraud being reported to Avon and Somerset Police and the Insolvency Service which is part of the then Business,Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. A furious French Colleague contacted Andrew to report that the French Director had just been given an award presented by the British Ambassador to Paris and Lord Digby-Jones (GOAT)
■From redacted documents secured under the Freedom of Information Act, the French Director started lobbying to have Andrew investigated in April 2008.
■In June 2008 he received a letter from the Insolvency Service in Plymouth to say he was under investigation under the terms of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, this despite them having no accounts because they could not access the electronic copies of the SAGE accounts.
■In November 2008 the Assistant Official Receiver confirmed in an email that in their view the French subsidiary was not part of their investigations as their advice was that it was not possible for French companies to have foreign shareholders !
■The conduct of the investigation was the source of endless abuse, the interviewer was balefully ignorant of commercial law, gave off the appearance of being a former policeman, told a number of direct lies and allowed Andrew to look at a former employee’s personal bank statements and files in contravention of the Data Protection Act, then could offer no explanation what those statements and files were doing with the company documentation.
■The Company’s former accountants were threatened with investigation, to the extent that they took legal advice.
■Mandelson was appointed Secretary of State 3rd October 2008, it is his decision to seek disqualification orders against company directors. Liam Fox MP met Andrew and was shown all of the documentation relating to the criminal fraud. Fox lobbied Mandelson and was rebuffed.
■Further evidence was supplied to the Secretary of State in July 2009, including witness statements and French Court documents to show the extent of the French Fraud and the effect it had had on the British Company. All of this evidence was rejected and returned to Andrew unread.
■From redacted documents received by Andrew under FOI , the Official Receiver’s recommendation to move forward to Proceedings was rejected for lack of evidence in May 2009, saying it ‘required more work done on it’
■In August 2009 with days to spare before being statute barred, proceedings were authorised by Secretary of State Mandelson against Andrew to be disbarred as a director for eight years. If Andrew was so minded to sign a confession and to say a false set of accounts prepared by the Secretary of State were true (that omitted the French subsidiary) , the ban would be reduced to seven years.
■Andrew and his lawyers refused to sign, and tried to negotiate with the appointed lawyers to no avail to drop the case.
■When the evidence in the case was finally released to Andrew it soon became apparent that-
■The winding up order made against the company was made by somebody who was not a creditor. The Official Receiver knew this and sought to hide the supporting documentation and invoices that had been altered
■The French Director had supplied the Official Receiver with forged Delivery Notes, the Official Receiver made no attempt to verify them.
■The Official Receiver had made no attempt to contact the Court appointed Receiver in Coutances, but entered into very friendly correspondence with the French Director. The Official Receiver allowed the transfer of assets , goods and cash to the French Director’s company at nil value.
It costs not less than £50 000 to mount a defence in actions such as this, Andrew’s legal insurers refused to consider this was an action they would cover, it does not take long to burn through legal fees, and with money running short Andrew compromised and settled on a voluntary undertaking with the Secretary of State for five and a half years not to act as a company Director with an undertaking that a s17 hearing would be heard by the District Judge before the undertaking took affect on July 13th 2010. The Court Order of 22nd June confirms that hearing never took place because the Secretary of State two days before the hearing in July had issued no instructions to counsel to attend and had broken the settlement by rushing into print and online trumpeting their success on the 1st July. The District Judge then signed an order to allow Andrew to continue to act as a Director in two designated companies, an order that was renewed on the 11th of October 2010 pending the outcome of the next full hearing.
Andrew released the following personal statement in October:
“I first wish to repudiate the voluntary undertaking I signed on 22nd June 2010, the accounts so presented were false, the Official Receiver knew they were false, I knew they were false, they were based on perjury in both French and English Courts, based on forged documents supplied by the French Director who colluded with the Official Receiver to transfer assets at nil value. I simply signed to end the attrition of costs by an overbearing State and because of the effect this war of attrition has had on my family. That is the end of one battle, but I have not given up the fight in this war.
I am grateful for the support of my legal teams in both France and England, to Liam Fox MP and to the members of the NCC of the Libertarian Party who refused to accept my offered resignation last June as Treasurer and Deputy Leader of the Party, and that despite the Court Order of the 11th October 2010 examining whether the poorly written, oppressive anti business CDDA 1986 can extend its authority over companies that are not registered in this country and to political parties and to charitable organisations, I will continue to seek the leadership of the Libertarian Party. Therefore it is only fair that all members are aware of this cloud that hangs over me before casting their vote.
I welcome the intervention of Ed Davey MP and look forward to the results of his review and for the opportunity of a meeting with senior officials to present the evidence that Dr Liam Fox has seen and quite rightly has called a scandal.
This will not however stop me seeking a Court order on the 25th October against the Secretary of State following the ruling of the Information Commissioner of the 22nd September. I will also be launching a civil action against the Secretary of State, Official Receiver and French Director, as both a creditor and shareholder of my former company for the wrongful transfer of assets , equipment and cash to the French Director at nil value.
I can however only express my displeasure at the lack of action by the Avon & Somerset Chief Constable in this case in relation to the Fraud and Theft that has occurred. The constant pleading of lack of resources has further undermined my confidence in Law enforcement.
I was a Classical Liberal before I help found the Party, my experiences of politicised public servants under the last administration have only confirmed that I must continue with that fight. I am confident the Parliament never intended the CDDA Act to be applied to foreign companies over which they have no jurisdiction , nor to political parties which is a breach of basic political Liberty, and I am confident that the Judge will come to the same conclusion "
ENDS
I will be at the Party AGM on November 27th, look forward to greeting Andrew as our new Party Leader and will support him in any way I can in the face of state oppression. It seems that Cable is continuing the practice of Mandelsonian dark arts.
Mr John Bercow
Speaker to the House of Commons
Dear Mr Bercow
On the 12th November 2010 the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills Dr Vince Cable MP instructed a firm of solicitors, Osborne Clarke of Bristol to write to District Judge Watson of the Bristol Registry requiring that I have leave of the Court to act as elected Leader of the Libertarian Party, further more and I quote:
‘Our client does not consider that Mr Withers has currently demonstrated sufficient need for leave in respect of the entity’
The Libertarian Party is a registered party within the meaning of the Political Parties,Elections and Referendums Act 2000, and I have a mandate from the members of the party to act as the party leader as from the 27th November, what further sufficient need do I require ?
It is extraordinary that a Minister of the Crown has made such a legal move against the leader of a minor party and creates a dangerous precedent constitutionally. Can you please advise when government ministers and the executive think that they can act in such a manner, and interfere with the internal workings of another party through the Courts.
Can you please urgently advise as Chairman of the Speakers Committee under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act, when such powers were transfered from the Electoral Commission and to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills.
I have no intention of seeking the leave of the Court to act as the leader of the Libertarian Party and I suspect this act is both illegal and ultra vires on the part of the Secretary of State. I am urgently seeking Counsels opinion on this letter.
I would be grateful for your urgent observations by return.
Yours sincerely
Andrew P Withers
Leader Designate
Libertarian Party
In the latest turn of events in Andrew's four year legal tussles with The Department of Business, Innovation & Skills, a District Judge in the Bristol Registry has ordered that he should list all of the companies and organisations that he is an executive member of so that it can be decided by the Court whether he should be given permission to continue. Amongst the organisations specifically named is the Libertarian Party.
On the 22nd September 2010, the Information Commissioner ruled that when the Department was being run by Mandelson it withheld evidence that Andrew Withers wished to rely on in Court, and that they should release it ‘without further delay’. That ruling has so far been ignored by The Secretary of State’s officials. If the order is further ignored by this Friday, Andrew Withers will be seeking a Court Order to compel the Secretary Of State to comply with the ICO order under sec7 (9) Data Protection Act 1998.
Andrew's local MP is Dr Liam Fox and has been extremely supportive in a case that he has called in a personal telephone call a ‘scandal’, and found time in the midst of the strategic defence review to have personal meeting with Ed Davey MP the responsible Minister in the coalition Government on the 27th September 2010 to discuss the case. After which Ed Davey has ordered a review into the case by senior officials and a meeting has been suggested with senior officials to try to resolve the situation.
Andrew is currently writing a book about his experiences, and admits that new chapters are being added as one man’s fight against a politicised bureaucracy continues into a fifth year.
The story started in 2006 when a French company that Andrew was a gerant (director) of was illegally placed into liquidation by its French Director in contravention of the company statuts and on a perjured statement of affairs. The Court appointed Receiver was paid 8000€ to bury the company, and the French Director made off with the assets and finished goods . An investigating French barrister appointed by Andrew Withers visited the Receiver in Coutances and noted that there were no accounts, invoices or supporting documentation. The Barrister described the situation as the worst case of corporate fraud he had seen in over forty years of practice.
The unfortunate direct consequence of this fraud was that it brought down the British company down as well and it ceased trading in 2006 unfortunately four customers and a number of corporate creditors lost money.
The company was wound up in 2007, and Andrew presented himself to the Official Receiver with supporting documentation and statements from the French Investigating Barrister as to the veracity of the illegal winding up of the company by the French Director causing the failure of the company. He was complemented on the professionalism of the presentation of the narrative and whilst he could not promise that nothing more would be heard from the Insolvency Service, he was satisfied with the narrative.
In October 2007 , Andrew became one of the five founding members of the Libertarian Party sickened by the growth of the security state established by Blair and continued by Brown and the fact that the State was out of control and the State was absorbing more and more taxpayers funds. Three days later the run on Northern Rock began.
From this point the story started to take a bizarre and disturbing twist.
■Despite the French fraud being reported to Avon and Somerset Police and the Insolvency Service which is part of the then Business,Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. A furious French Colleague contacted Andrew to report that the French Director had just been given an award presented by the British Ambassador to Paris and Lord Digby-Jones (GOAT)
■From redacted documents secured under the Freedom of Information Act, the French Director started lobbying to have Andrew investigated in April 2008.
■In June 2008 he received a letter from the Insolvency Service in Plymouth to say he was under investigation under the terms of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, this despite them having no accounts because they could not access the electronic copies of the SAGE accounts.
■In November 2008 the Assistant Official Receiver confirmed in an email that in their view the French subsidiary was not part of their investigations as their advice was that it was not possible for French companies to have foreign shareholders !
■The conduct of the investigation was the source of endless abuse, the interviewer was balefully ignorant of commercial law, gave off the appearance of being a former policeman, told a number of direct lies and allowed Andrew to look at a former employee’s personal bank statements and files in contravention of the Data Protection Act, then could offer no explanation what those statements and files were doing with the company documentation.
■The Company’s former accountants were threatened with investigation, to the extent that they took legal advice.
■Mandelson was appointed Secretary of State 3rd October 2008, it is his decision to seek disqualification orders against company directors. Liam Fox MP met Andrew and was shown all of the documentation relating to the criminal fraud. Fox lobbied Mandelson and was rebuffed.
■Further evidence was supplied to the Secretary of State in July 2009, including witness statements and French Court documents to show the extent of the French Fraud and the effect it had had on the British Company. All of this evidence was rejected and returned to Andrew unread.
■From redacted documents received by Andrew under FOI , the Official Receiver’s recommendation to move forward to Proceedings was rejected for lack of evidence in May 2009, saying it ‘required more work done on it’
■In August 2009 with days to spare before being statute barred, proceedings were authorised by Secretary of State Mandelson against Andrew to be disbarred as a director for eight years. If Andrew was so minded to sign a confession and to say a false set of accounts prepared by the Secretary of State were true (that omitted the French subsidiary) , the ban would be reduced to seven years.
■Andrew and his lawyers refused to sign, and tried to negotiate with the appointed lawyers to no avail to drop the case.
■When the evidence in the case was finally released to Andrew it soon became apparent that-
■The winding up order made against the company was made by somebody who was not a creditor. The Official Receiver knew this and sought to hide the supporting documentation and invoices that had been altered
■The French Director had supplied the Official Receiver with forged Delivery Notes, the Official Receiver made no attempt to verify them.
■The Official Receiver had made no attempt to contact the Court appointed Receiver in Coutances, but entered into very friendly correspondence with the French Director. The Official Receiver allowed the transfer of assets , goods and cash to the French Director’s company at nil value.
It costs not less than £50 000 to mount a defence in actions such as this, Andrew’s legal insurers refused to consider this was an action they would cover, it does not take long to burn through legal fees, and with money running short Andrew compromised and settled on a voluntary undertaking with the Secretary of State for five and a half years not to act as a company Director with an undertaking that a s17 hearing would be heard by the District Judge before the undertaking took affect on July 13th 2010. The Court Order of 22nd June confirms that hearing never took place because the Secretary of State two days before the hearing in July had issued no instructions to counsel to attend and had broken the settlement by rushing into print and online trumpeting their success on the 1st July. The District Judge then signed an order to allow Andrew to continue to act as a Director in two designated companies, an order that was renewed on the 11th of October 2010 pending the outcome of the next full hearing.
Andrew released the following personal statement in October:
“I first wish to repudiate the voluntary undertaking I signed on 22nd June 2010, the accounts so presented were false, the Official Receiver knew they were false, I knew they were false, they were based on perjury in both French and English Courts, based on forged documents supplied by the French Director who colluded with the Official Receiver to transfer assets at nil value. I simply signed to end the attrition of costs by an overbearing State and because of the effect this war of attrition has had on my family. That is the end of one battle, but I have not given up the fight in this war.
I am grateful for the support of my legal teams in both France and England, to Liam Fox MP and to the members of the NCC of the Libertarian Party who refused to accept my offered resignation last June as Treasurer and Deputy Leader of the Party, and that despite the Court Order of the 11th October 2010 examining whether the poorly written, oppressive anti business CDDA 1986 can extend its authority over companies that are not registered in this country and to political parties and to charitable organisations, I will continue to seek the leadership of the Libertarian Party. Therefore it is only fair that all members are aware of this cloud that hangs over me before casting their vote.
I welcome the intervention of Ed Davey MP and look forward to the results of his review and for the opportunity of a meeting with senior officials to present the evidence that Dr Liam Fox has seen and quite rightly has called a scandal.
This will not however stop me seeking a Court order on the 25th October against the Secretary of State following the ruling of the Information Commissioner of the 22nd September. I will also be launching a civil action against the Secretary of State, Official Receiver and French Director, as both a creditor and shareholder of my former company for the wrongful transfer of assets , equipment and cash to the French Director at nil value.
I can however only express my displeasure at the lack of action by the Avon & Somerset Chief Constable in this case in relation to the Fraud and Theft that has occurred. The constant pleading of lack of resources has further undermined my confidence in Law enforcement.
I was a Classical Liberal before I help found the Party, my experiences of politicised public servants under the last administration have only confirmed that I must continue with that fight. I am confident the Parliament never intended the CDDA Act to be applied to foreign companies over which they have no jurisdiction , nor to political parties which is a breach of basic political Liberty, and I am confident that the Judge will come to the same conclusion "
ENDS
I will be at the Party AGM on November 27th, look forward to greeting Andrew as our new Party Leader and will support him in any way I can in the face of state oppression. It seems that Cable is continuing the practice of Mandelsonian dark arts.
Friday, November 05, 2010
Oldham East and the Libertarian Party
Earlier today I blogged about Phil Woolas and the election in Oldham East being re-run.
I then suggested to Andrew Withers, the Deputy Leader of the Libertarian Party, that we put up a candidate.
Andrew then got back to me suggesting that I might like to be said candidate.
So I now find myself Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Oldham East.
Funny old day.
I then suggested to Andrew Withers, the Deputy Leader of the Libertarian Party, that we put up a candidate.
Andrew then got back to me suggesting that I might like to be said candidate.
So I now find myself Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Oldham East.
Funny old day.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Autumn, the Start of the Political Year
I always feel that autumn ushers in the new political year. The serious parties hold their conferences and elected parliamentarians return to work after a lengthy break from mithering, lecturing and dreaming up new ways to tax us.
As well as conferences autumn sees serious local election candidates preparing their latest newsletters and hitting the campaign trail, ready for elections the following May. Even after promising themselves to start campaigning straight after the previous May elections, most leave it until autumn to begin.
Of course the cocky, or maybe naive candidates begin their May election campaigns in April, then blame everybody but themselves when they fail to get elected. But that happens in many cases and is one of the reasons why people complain that they only hear from politicians when they want a vote.
Having my birthday in October I've lost count of the number of birthdays spent at party conferences or other political events. I even spent my 21st birthday en route to the Tory conference drinking Newcastle Brown Ale. But this year will be different. I'll be joining Nikki Sinclaire MEP at her EU membership referendum fringe meeting at the Labour conference in Manchester on Tuesday 28 September, if you would like to join us it's at Central Hall, Oldham Street at 7-00pm. Then, for the foreseeable future that's it, no meetings planned, no conferences to attend and certainly no election campaigns to fight. After over 30 years in politics I need a breather.
My disillusionment started setting in about five years ago. While I've met some fantastic people in politics I estimate that for every one person that reaches a high position in a party, there are probably about three who I would rather not touch with a bargepole. It seems to be a higher concentration in smaller parties for some reason, perhaps small parties attract obsessives. And I speak after spending the last ten years in UKIP then the Libertarian Party. Remember, throughout the expenses scandal little was said of two smaller party MEPs who actually went to jail, Tom Wise and Ashley Mote.
But the electorate aren't blameless in the shambles that is current politics. I have personally leafletted streets for months and months only to have residents claim to have received nothing for years. There are millions of people who moan but don't vote. People who are so incredibly angry about a local issue that you organise a protest, and the usual half a dozen turn up but the moaners stay at home watching Corrie and moaning.
Then there are the party members who turn up to every meeting, especially if there is food and drink around, but are nowhere to be seen when there is real work to be done. But they talk the talk and usually slag off the people that actually get off their arses and do something.
Of course our system works against truly representative democracy, you only have to look at the Frankenstein monster that seized power after May 6th. Even with pots of money smaller parties find it virtually impossible to break through the three party system. Look at the money James Goldsmith threw at the Referendum Party in 1997. So Caroline Lucas was elected in May for the Green Party. But her being elected in Brighton was a bit like George Galloway being elected in Bethnal Green. Hardly typical constituencies. And her great statement to date as an MP? She wants MPs to job share. Wow.
Smaller parties increasingly demand some form of proportional representation. But cynics like me often wonder if they would be so much in favour of PR if they could win an election under the current FPTP system. Or are they genuinely anxious that all parties, even the BNP, get proportional representation in the House of Commons?
Maybe part of the problem is that the line between pressure group and political party has become blurred. The Greens and the environment, UKIP and the EU, BNP and immigration, English Democrats and an English parliament and so on. But the overwhelming majority of people don't vote on a single issue, so they have very limited electoral success. But instead of accepting that, they increasingly campaign for PR, blaming the system for their own failures perhaps.
If we get PR that is likely to create new problems. The smaller parties will still only get a handful of seats, but months and months of haggling could follow general elections with no party having a clear majority. More and more compromise during negotiations could lead to even fewer voters getting something near what they voted for than under the current FPTP system.
The real question that needs asking about PR is whether we want the current system of representative democracy, where governments are formed on the number of representatives elected by electors voting in groups known as constituencies, or would we prefer the numbers to be divvied up on the basis of percentages? Once people have made their minds up on that, then a proper debate can begin about our form of representative democracy.
Either way I see nothing but increasing disillusionment with our democracy, and the smaller parties may find that when the light of electoral success shines on them, the public like what they see even less than they like the big three parties.
Maybe the future for those of us disillusioned with party politics is to campaign within pressure groups to influence the current three big parties. Only time will tell.
As well as conferences autumn sees serious local election candidates preparing their latest newsletters and hitting the campaign trail, ready for elections the following May. Even after promising themselves to start campaigning straight after the previous May elections, most leave it until autumn to begin.
Of course the cocky, or maybe naive candidates begin their May election campaigns in April, then blame everybody but themselves when they fail to get elected. But that happens in many cases and is one of the reasons why people complain that they only hear from politicians when they want a vote.
Having my birthday in October I've lost count of the number of birthdays spent at party conferences or other political events. I even spent my 21st birthday en route to the Tory conference drinking Newcastle Brown Ale. But this year will be different. I'll be joining Nikki Sinclaire MEP at her EU membership referendum fringe meeting at the Labour conference in Manchester on Tuesday 28 September, if you would like to join us it's at Central Hall, Oldham Street at 7-00pm. Then, for the foreseeable future that's it, no meetings planned, no conferences to attend and certainly no election campaigns to fight. After over 30 years in politics I need a breather.
My disillusionment started setting in about five years ago. While I've met some fantastic people in politics I estimate that for every one person that reaches a high position in a party, there are probably about three who I would rather not touch with a bargepole. It seems to be a higher concentration in smaller parties for some reason, perhaps small parties attract obsessives. And I speak after spending the last ten years in UKIP then the Libertarian Party. Remember, throughout the expenses scandal little was said of two smaller party MEPs who actually went to jail, Tom Wise and Ashley Mote.
But the electorate aren't blameless in the shambles that is current politics. I have personally leafletted streets for months and months only to have residents claim to have received nothing for years. There are millions of people who moan but don't vote. People who are so incredibly angry about a local issue that you organise a protest, and the usual half a dozen turn up but the moaners stay at home watching Corrie and moaning.
Then there are the party members who turn up to every meeting, especially if there is food and drink around, but are nowhere to be seen when there is real work to be done. But they talk the talk and usually slag off the people that actually get off their arses and do something.
Of course our system works against truly representative democracy, you only have to look at the Frankenstein monster that seized power after May 6th. Even with pots of money smaller parties find it virtually impossible to break through the three party system. Look at the money James Goldsmith threw at the Referendum Party in 1997. So Caroline Lucas was elected in May for the Green Party. But her being elected in Brighton was a bit like George Galloway being elected in Bethnal Green. Hardly typical constituencies. And her great statement to date as an MP? She wants MPs to job share. Wow.
Smaller parties increasingly demand some form of proportional representation. But cynics like me often wonder if they would be so much in favour of PR if they could win an election under the current FPTP system. Or are they genuinely anxious that all parties, even the BNP, get proportional representation in the House of Commons?
Maybe part of the problem is that the line between pressure group and political party has become blurred. The Greens and the environment, UKIP and the EU, BNP and immigration, English Democrats and an English parliament and so on. But the overwhelming majority of people don't vote on a single issue, so they have very limited electoral success. But instead of accepting that, they increasingly campaign for PR, blaming the system for their own failures perhaps.
If we get PR that is likely to create new problems. The smaller parties will still only get a handful of seats, but months and months of haggling could follow general elections with no party having a clear majority. More and more compromise during negotiations could lead to even fewer voters getting something near what they voted for than under the current FPTP system.
The real question that needs asking about PR is whether we want the current system of representative democracy, where governments are formed on the number of representatives elected by electors voting in groups known as constituencies, or would we prefer the numbers to be divvied up on the basis of percentages? Once people have made their minds up on that, then a proper debate can begin about our form of representative democracy.
Either way I see nothing but increasing disillusionment with our democracy, and the smaller parties may find that when the light of electoral success shines on them, the public like what they see even less than they like the big three parties.
Maybe the future for those of us disillusioned with party politics is to campaign within pressure groups to influence the current three big parties. Only time will tell.
Friday, July 16, 2010
More Bullshit from the European Union
The European Union is at it again, indeed when does it ever stop? Its authoritarian march towards supreme power and total control of our lives carries on relentlessly. I am only really concerened about UK withdrawal from the monster, it's up to other countries what they do, but I sense an ever growing scepticism throughout Europe to the EU. So what has caused my anger today?
For starters it's their lack of acceptance that the private sector is just that, private, and should be interfered with by the state as little as possible, ideally not at all. But no, where the EU see human interaction they want to control, regulate and legislate against it.
The leviathan is now concerened that there are not enough wimmin in the boardrooms of private companies. So what? Most of my working experience has been in the charity world where, I would guess, women are at least as well represented in senior management positions as men, maybe even disroportionately better represented. Do I care? Not a jot as long as they can do the job. By the way, I wonder what the EU think about the proportion of male/female primary school teachers throughout Europe, not just here?
Of course the EU is only 'flagging up the issue' at this stage, confident that the private sector will change the perceived imbalance. But as with every dictatorship behind that 'flagging up' is the threat that under the Lisbon Treaty, they have the power to enforce 'equality' if it doesn't happen voluntarily, or naturally.
Then there is the prospect of EU police forces having access to all your records: DNA, bank accounts, telephone and email records, everything that the British state has access to. This proposal is being floated under the European Investigation Order. Then it's only a hop, skip and a jump to Inspector Cutabollockoff kicking your door down at 4-00am to drag you off to Bucharest Central for interrogation. The British police and the British state scare me, this really brought me out in a cold sweat when I read about it.
The hat-trick today was the EU announcing, in true Mussolini style, that they will get the trains running on time! How? By forcing member states (or vassel states if you prefer) to adopt their new railway timetabling software. Bollocks! The last time I had a train cancelled was because the driver was in bed with a hangover, or at least he hadn't turned up for work. We all know about the wrong type of leaves on the line, the old signal failure excuse and the engineering works that have been screwing up the West Coast Mainline since about 1880. Typical EU delusional bollocks.
So what's the answer? Well pressure groups are all very well but too often preach to the converted. We all know that a majority of people in the country today would be happy to see us withdraw from the EU, but they are unaware of a credible political party advocating that. Also, while 50%+ would probably like to see us out of the EU, only about 8%, if that, will vote in a general election on that single issue, they vote on a whole range of issues from health and education to tax, law and order and all the others.
Furthermore, and I know from experience, that politicians who, rightly or wrongly, bang on, and on, and on about nothing but the EU turn the electorate off. Withdrawal has to be part of a cohesive manifesto including the whole range of government activities, preferably hacking away at the activity of government, and freeing people from the current invasive, authoritarian state that is crippling freedom and liberty. That is the only way to get into Westminster where real change can become possible.
If you think that no such party exists then I suggest you visit the Libertarian Party website. You will be pleasantly surprised.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Libertarian v Fabian
The following has appeared on several other blogs so I'm not claiming it as my own. I'm reproducing it because it's good for a giggle, and quite accurate.
Thank you to whoever originated it.
Libertarian / Fabian Explained
If a Libertarian doesn’t like guns, he doesn’t buy one.
If a Fabian doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a Libertarian is a vegetarian, he doesn’t eat meat.
If a Fabian is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a Libertarian sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
A Fabian wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.
If a Libertarian is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Fabian is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a black person is Libertarian, they see themselves as independently successful.
Their Fabian counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.
If a Libertarian is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A Fabian demands someone take care of him.
If a Libertarian doesn’t like a TV programme, he changes channels.
Fabians demand that those they don’t like be shut down.
If a Libertarian is an athiest, he doesn’t go to church.
A Fabian non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it’s a foreign religion, of course!)
If a Libertarian decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A Fabian demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a Libertarian slips and falls over, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.
If a Fabian slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he’s in labour and then sues.
If a Libertarian reads this, he’ll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A Fabian will delete it because he’s “offended”.
Thank you to whoever originated it.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
More Labour Party Bollocks!
Senior, maybe senile Labour members, seem to have completely lost the plot judging by this article from Roy Hattersley.
Just two quotes from it sum it up:
"I am a great admirer of Peter Mandelson".
I've never been a believer in euthanasia but sometimes....
Then there's this utter bollocks:
"Making Labour a genuine libertarian party again...."
I thought that you once had to actually be something to become it again. Or maybe Hattersley just doesn't know what libertarianism is. Either way he's only fit for the knacker's yard now obviously.
Just two quotes from it sum it up:
"I am a great admirer of Peter Mandelson".
I've never been a believer in euthanasia but sometimes....
Then there's this utter bollocks:
"Making Labour a genuine libertarian party again...."
I thought that you once had to actually be something to become it again. Or maybe Hattersley just doesn't know what libertarianism is. Either way he's only fit for the knacker's yard now obviously.
Monday, May 10, 2010
New Government Announced-Shoplifters!
Whatever the occasion Morrissey seems to have said something pithy and to the point. At least shoplifters weren't planning a future war last night on Channel 4!
As long as they are bickering about the keys to No 10 they're not passing even more oppressive legislation against us. It might be nice if they don't agree on a course of action until May 2015, a bit of peace for us.
As long as they are bickering about the keys to No 10 they're not passing even more oppressive legislation against us. It might be nice if they don't agree on a course of action until May 2015, a bit of peace for us.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Libertarian Party Endorses Nikki Sinclaire in Meriden
I am pleased to say that the Libertarian Party has endorsed Nikki's campaign here in Meriden. Over a pleasant lunch Nikki and I met the LPUK's Deputy Leader and had a very interesting meeting.
As a libertarian Nikki found it impossible to remain a part of UKIP's grouping in the EU parliament, which largely consists of right-wing authoritarians and assorted oddballs. In standing up and being counted, not wishing to be associated with homophobes, Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites, Nikki had the UKIP whip withdrawn. She has since been undemocratically run out of UKIP and is standing in Meriden as an independent under the banner of the Solihull and Meriden Residents Association.
Vote Nikki
Libertarian Party
As a libertarian Nikki found it impossible to remain a part of UKIP's grouping in the EU parliament, which largely consists of right-wing authoritarians and assorted oddballs. In standing up and being counted, not wishing to be associated with homophobes, Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites, Nikki had the UKIP whip withdrawn. She has since been undemocratically run out of UKIP and is standing in Meriden as an independent under the banner of the Solihull and Meriden Residents Association.
Vote Nikki
Libertarian Party
Friday, March 12, 2010
Morrissey
After today in Manchester, then London on the milk train for a meeting tomorrow back later on tomorrow, it's time for some music from the genius that is Morrissey.
Top man!
Top man!
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
CCTV- State Surveillance
I've just discovered the following film on YouTube. The documentary, looking at the ever expanding use of CCTV, includes Sean Gabb, Tim Evans and Brian Micklethwait of the Libertarian Alliance.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Alex Ellis Roswell-Libertarian Party
There are countless reasons for people becoming politically active, the overwhelming majority are well intentioned and honourable. How far the well intentioned and honourable can go under our current system is another issue.
Recently the Libertarian Party were extremely pleased to welcome to our ranks Alex Ellis Roswell, Alex's blog is Alex Ellis Roswell LPUK. Alex is standing in the local elections in Canterbury and will be the country's youngest candidate. I invited Alex to do a guest post on my blog about joining the Libertarian Party.
Following is his very personal account of what led him into politics, and the Libertarian Party.
I got actively involved with Politics at the age of 16 because I had a passion. My passion was to see positive change happen in my lifetime. Something totally different. To understand how I ended up with this passion and involved with The Libertarian Party, you must first understand where I come from.
I was born in Margate, Kent to a divorced Mother. My Mum. A legend and an inspirational person in my life. She worked and struggled every hour of the day to give me the best upbringing possible in what was a pretty harsh environment to live in. When I was 9 years old she met and married someone equally as special to me. My Step Dad. We moved out to live with him just before they got married. He lived in a beautiful village 30 miles away, just outside of the as beautiful city of Canterbury. He was healthy, middle aged and working for the ambulance service. That was until a year or so later, when his health took an irreversible turn for the worse. He suffered a major heart attack which was to be one of 3 in the coming years, and a mere drop in the ocean compared to his strokes some years later. Needless to say he was forced out of work. My Mum had left work and became his full time carer. Through all of my teenage life I lived in a household totally dependent on the Government and the Welfare System.
I saw the struggle of my Mum and Dad to be financially independent. I saw them fail and forced to accept Government “help”. I saw them struggling to pay for food and bills with what the Government dictated they have. I have spent my whole life witnessing a struggle for independence. An independence from Government, the Welfare System and the hold over people’s lives that these institutions currently have.
This constant struggle led me to hold very Liberal beliefs. What if my Mum and Dad hadn’t been forced to pay taxes all their lives? What if they had been able to save enough money up during their working lives, to be independent when life turned sour? What if things could change? How can I personally make things change? These were all questions that were (and still are) racing around my head like a greyhound on a dusty race track.
This is what created my passion for positive change and a totally renewed direction. My first experience of Politics was in The UK Independence Party. I spent nearly a year with them helping at different elections and meeting some truly great people. That was until it finally hit me that UKIP were in fact far from the Libertarian party they purported to be and were steaming towards a head on collision with the Authoritarian Right of Politics.
This brought me to The Libertarian Party. A party I had heard much about, but never given any serious consideration to. It wasn’t until I fully read their manifesto, their beliefs and their vision and then compared them to the other parties that I decided to make the plunge and put my support and faith with them. The Libertarian Party represents a breath of fresh air in the current dull and stale political landscape of the UK. They represent not a half hearted “change” but a true change in direction. I believe LPUK will become a strong voice for all true liberals and people who believe in freedom, democracy and liberty.
Alex Ellis Roswell
Recently the Libertarian Party were extremely pleased to welcome to our ranks Alex Ellis Roswell, Alex's blog is Alex Ellis Roswell LPUK. Alex is standing in the local elections in Canterbury and will be the country's youngest candidate. I invited Alex to do a guest post on my blog about joining the Libertarian Party.
Following is his very personal account of what led him into politics, and the Libertarian Party.
I got actively involved with Politics at the age of 16 because I had a passion. My passion was to see positive change happen in my lifetime. Something totally different. To understand how I ended up with this passion and involved with The Libertarian Party, you must first understand where I come from.
I was born in Margate, Kent to a divorced Mother. My Mum. A legend and an inspirational person in my life. She worked and struggled every hour of the day to give me the best upbringing possible in what was a pretty harsh environment to live in. When I was 9 years old she met and married someone equally as special to me. My Step Dad. We moved out to live with him just before they got married. He lived in a beautiful village 30 miles away, just outside of the as beautiful city of Canterbury. He was healthy, middle aged and working for the ambulance service. That was until a year or so later, when his health took an irreversible turn for the worse. He suffered a major heart attack which was to be one of 3 in the coming years, and a mere drop in the ocean compared to his strokes some years later. Needless to say he was forced out of work. My Mum had left work and became his full time carer. Through all of my teenage life I lived in a household totally dependent on the Government and the Welfare System.
I saw the struggle of my Mum and Dad to be financially independent. I saw them fail and forced to accept Government “help”. I saw them struggling to pay for food and bills with what the Government dictated they have. I have spent my whole life witnessing a struggle for independence. An independence from Government, the Welfare System and the hold over people’s lives that these institutions currently have.
This constant struggle led me to hold very Liberal beliefs. What if my Mum and Dad hadn’t been forced to pay taxes all their lives? What if they had been able to save enough money up during their working lives, to be independent when life turned sour? What if things could change? How can I personally make things change? These were all questions that were (and still are) racing around my head like a greyhound on a dusty race track.
This is what created my passion for positive change and a totally renewed direction. My first experience of Politics was in The UK Independence Party. I spent nearly a year with them helping at different elections and meeting some truly great people. That was until it finally hit me that UKIP were in fact far from the Libertarian party they purported to be and were steaming towards a head on collision with the Authoritarian Right of Politics.
This brought me to The Libertarian Party. A party I had heard much about, but never given any serious consideration to. It wasn’t until I fully read their manifesto, their beliefs and their vision and then compared them to the other parties that I decided to make the plunge and put my support and faith with them. The Libertarian Party represents a breath of fresh air in the current dull and stale political landscape of the UK. They represent not a half hearted “change” but a true change in direction. I believe LPUK will become a strong voice for all true liberals and people who believe in freedom, democracy and liberty.
Alex Ellis Roswell
Friday, January 29, 2010
Hayek v Keynes Rap
OK, I nicked this from the Libertarian Party Blog, there must be a spot of the thieving socialist in me somewhere!
Tuesday, January 05, 2010
A polemic from the leader of the UK Libertarian Party
My friends,
We are broke. Our country—whatever it may once have been—is now laden with debt. And this isn't "the government's debt": it is our debt.
The government has no money but what it takes—what it extorts—from us.
We have gone beyond consensus politics: if a man were to come to your door, with a gun, and demand half of everything that you earned—on pain of severe punishment, on pain of the total ruination of your life—would you not protest?
For a moment, lay aside those dutiful thoughts of those starving millions beyond your gate, and think, instead, of those within your own household—within your own family: would you not rather protect them first?
Of course you would: they are your kith and kin and you would expect—would you not?—that everyone, like you, would defend theirs against you were you the one holding the gun.
The government has now utterly removed from you the means of protecting yourself and your family against the man with the gun: indeed, you dare not defend yourself because you fear that it is you, not the mugger, who would end up in the dock.
For the government is the man with the gun, demanding tithes from you: the government is here, at your door. But not randomly.
No.
The government has gone out and bought itself nice things—plasma TVs, second homes, duckhouses, moats. And jobs, and votes. All of those things that you could not afford—because it has been here before: at your door, with a gun.
Five years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those children who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.
Four years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those unhealthy who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.
Three years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those uneducated who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.
Two years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those feckless bankers who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.
One year ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those MPs who had no duck-houses or second homes or moats. You paid, because you had no option.
And now the government has spent everything that you had to give, and more, on its pet projects—on buying its second homes, on buying its duckhouses, on buying its votes—and none of it benefited you and yours. Not even by one iota.
The government didn't care that you couldn't afford to give any more: it didn't care that you had no money.
The government didn't care that you had lost your job: the government didn't care that all of those thousands of pounds it took in National Insurance payments translated into a few hundred when you were in need.
And now, when you are getting back on your feet—back in a job that is not as good as the one the government destroyed, back struggling to look after your family on the pittance you are paid, back paying off your debts—the government, too, is back: it's back with the gun.
The government is back—demanding half of what you broke your back to earn—because it has more grand schemes, more votes to buy, more trinkets to deliver to its favoured ones.
Will you so willingly hand over the sweat of your brow? Will you so willingly condemn you and yours to penury? Will you capitulate again?
Or will you fight?
Join us—and help us to stop the extortion.
Join us—and understand that providing for you and yours is not a sin.
Join us—and realise that a society that pulls together is a society that stays together.
Join us—and help us fight for a future in which people help each other voluntarily, because it is right and fitting to do so.
Join us—and help to build a future in which men, women and children take back their work, their birthrights, their dignity and their compassion from a government that cares nothing for you.
Join us.
Because—whether the government is Tory, Labour or LibDem—soon you will have nothing left to lose.
Chris Mounsey
Leader-Libertarian Party (UK)
Libertarian Party website.
Devil's Kitchen blog.
We are broke. Our country—whatever it may once have been—is now laden with debt. And this isn't "the government's debt": it is our debt.
The government has no money but what it takes—what it extorts—from us.
We have gone beyond consensus politics: if a man were to come to your door, with a gun, and demand half of everything that you earned—on pain of severe punishment, on pain of the total ruination of your life—would you not protest?
For a moment, lay aside those dutiful thoughts of those starving millions beyond your gate, and think, instead, of those within your own household—within your own family: would you not rather protect them first?
Of course you would: they are your kith and kin and you would expect—would you not?—that everyone, like you, would defend theirs against you were you the one holding the gun.
The government has now utterly removed from you the means of protecting yourself and your family against the man with the gun: indeed, you dare not defend yourself because you fear that it is you, not the mugger, who would end up in the dock.
For the government is the man with the gun, demanding tithes from you: the government is here, at your door. But not randomly.
No.
The government has gone out and bought itself nice things—plasma TVs, second homes, duckhouses, moats. And jobs, and votes. All of those things that you could not afford—because it has been here before: at your door, with a gun.
Five years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those children who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.
Four years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those unhealthy who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.
Three years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those uneducated who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.
Two years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those feckless bankers who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.
One year ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those MPs who had no duck-houses or second homes or moats. You paid, because you had no option.
And now the government has spent everything that you had to give, and more, on its pet projects—on buying its second homes, on buying its duckhouses, on buying its votes—and none of it benefited you and yours. Not even by one iota.
The government didn't care that you couldn't afford to give any more: it didn't care that you had no money.
The government didn't care that you had lost your job: the government didn't care that all of those thousands of pounds it took in National Insurance payments translated into a few hundred when you were in need.
And now, when you are getting back on your feet—back in a job that is not as good as the one the government destroyed, back struggling to look after your family on the pittance you are paid, back paying off your debts—the government, too, is back: it's back with the gun.
The government is back—demanding half of what you broke your back to earn—because it has more grand schemes, more votes to buy, more trinkets to deliver to its favoured ones.
Will you so willingly hand over the sweat of your brow? Will you so willingly condemn you and yours to penury? Will you capitulate again?
Or will you fight?
Join us—and help us to stop the extortion.
Join us—and understand that providing for you and yours is not a sin.
Join us—and realise that a society that pulls together is a society that stays together.
Join us—and help us fight for a future in which people help each other voluntarily, because it is right and fitting to do so.
Join us—and help to build a future in which men, women and children take back their work, their birthrights, their dignity and their compassion from a government that cares nothing for you.
Join us.
Because—whether the government is Tory, Labour or LibDem—soon you will have nothing left to lose.
Chris Mounsey
Leader-Libertarian Party (UK)
Libertarian Party website.
Devil's Kitchen blog.
Friday, January 01, 2010
Happy New Year
Happy New Year to everybody. Let's hope for a New Year of peace, freedom and liberty, but don't hold your breath.
My prediction is for a hung parliament with Dave in charge. So, good to see Cyclops gone, but what real difference will there be?
We may not win the election but the Libertarian Party is the only libertarian alternative to the tired old authoritarian parties and anti-EU pressure groups. Why not give us a try?
My prediction is for a hung parliament with Dave in charge. So, good to see Cyclops gone, but what real difference will there be?
We may not win the election but the Libertarian Party is the only libertarian alternative to the tired old authoritarian parties and anti-EU pressure groups. Why not give us a try?
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Sign Of The Times
If you don't read it I can recommend it. The Week is a great read that updates you on the weeks news from across the media spectrum, giving you news summaries from the Telegraph to the Grauniad.
One particularly typical New Labour cock-up highlighted this week was the GP's surgery in Preston docked/fined £350 because it hadn't received any complaints. Yes, hadn't received any, that's right.
One of the New Labour government's targets is for GPs to show how they deal with complaints. This GP had none, so lost out by missing the 'dealing with complaints' target set by the state.
An NHS spokesman said they were only obeying orders. Actually, according to The Week, the spokesman said they had to follow guidelines. But how long until that is the excuse given by some bureaucrat as the police state tightens its grip?
When you hear about these kinds of things it illustrates why the Libertarian Party health policy is so refreshing. I think our health is far too important to be controlled, and abused, by politicians and the state and that sorry tale proves the point.
One particularly typical New Labour cock-up highlighted this week was the GP's surgery in Preston docked/fined £350 because it hadn't received any complaints. Yes, hadn't received any, that's right.
One of the New Labour government's targets is for GPs to show how they deal with complaints. This GP had none, so lost out by missing the 'dealing with complaints' target set by the state.
An NHS spokesman said they were only obeying orders. Actually, according to The Week, the spokesman said they had to follow guidelines. But how long until that is the excuse given by some bureaucrat as the police state tightens its grip?
When you hear about these kinds of things it illustrates why the Libertarian Party health policy is so refreshing. I think our health is far too important to be controlled, and abused, by politicians and the state and that sorry tale proves the point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)