With more and more councils realising the mistake of having Bin Collections changed to fortnightly will our own Swale B C keep to a weekly collection?
I recently received the item below from a friend and by God does it make you think but then again you get what you vote for, its inmates have taken over the assylum
Makes you think!
Can you imagine working for a company/organisation that has a little more than 600 employees and has the following employee statistics?
29 have been accused of spouse abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad cheques
117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
3 have done time for assault
71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit14 have been arrested on drug-related charges8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 are currently defendants in lawsuits84 have been arrested for drink driving in the last year
Which organization is this?
It's the 635 members of the House of Commons, the same group that Cranks out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
BRITISH TAKE NOTE
Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks. A day after a group of mainstream Muslim leaders pledged loyalty to Australia and her Queen at a special meeting with Prime Minister John Howard, he and his Ministers made it clear that extremists would face a crackdown. Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that Australia was a secular state, and its laws were made by parliament. "If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you", he said on National Television. "I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia: one the Australian law and another Islamic law that is false. If you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country, which practices it, perhaps, then, that's a better option", Costello said. Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked to move to the other country. Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should "clear off. Basically people who don't want to be Australians, and who don't want, to live by Australian values and understand them, well then, they can basically clear off", he said. Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: "IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians." "However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia." "However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand." "This idea of Australia being a multi-cultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. And as Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle." "This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom" "We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!" "Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture." "We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us." "If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like "A Fair Go", then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. By all means, keep your culture, but do not force it on others. "This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.""If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted." Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, citizens will find the backbone to start speaking and voicing the same truths !
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Gordan replies
Here is Gordon's reply I do enjoy a Political argument keep it up the both of you
Dear Derek
Thank you for taking the trouble to respond to my email in which I asked you to make clear where I had said, or, had written that I wanted to see 2200 houses built as part of the Kent Science Park proposal. I assume that since you have removed this allegation from your website you accept that you were wrong. It would be good to receive an apology, but perhaps that is pushing my luck!
Can I now respond on a para by para basis to your rather long reply:-
1) It is simply wrong of you to say that any housing development at the Kent Science Park has "nothing to do with Government numbers". The Government, via the unelected South East England Regional Assembly, has imposed on Kent (and Swale) thousands of additional houses. The borough council has a statutory obligation to find sufficient land within the borough for those houses. It is quite obvious that if they find land in one part of the borough (whether that be Sheppey or Bapchild) it reduces the pressure on other parts of the borough. Unlike you, I have opposed these additional houses since before the last General Election and continue to oppose them now. You, on the other hand, are on record as saying that we need an additional 5000 houses in the borough (over and above those in the local plan). Where exactly do you want those houses built? It would perhaps help the debate if you would answer this question, which I have posed on numerous occasions.
2) You once again make the allegation that I am setting one part of the constituency against the other. WIth all due respect, that shows how little you understand the battle that we are collectively fighting to stop the over development of our borough. It is a battle shared by Islanders and those living on the mainland alike. Your allegation also highlights the difference between you and me. You have opposed the Kent Science Park development, and for that I commend you, however, you have at the same time supported an increase in the number of houses being built in Queenborough. Because I happen to have consistently opposed both these developments, I fail to see how this can be construed as "setting one part of the constituency" against the other. Are you suggesting that I drop my objections to an increase in housing in Queenborough - from the 750 homes that SEEDA wanted two years ago (which I accepted), to the over 2000 that they want now? How does my support for the residents of Sheppey in general, and Queenborough in particular, detract from my support for the Five Parishes Opposition Group? Whilst on the subject of Sheppey, perhaps you would like to explain to the residents of Halfway why you want to sell off the Minster College site for housing to pay for an academy spread across the Danley, Cheyne and St George's middles school sites!
3) I have exactly the same degree of opposition (and tolerance) to the additional houses being imposed on our borough, whether that proposed development is in Bapchild, Tunstall, Iwade, Queenborough or Minster. My position is exactly the same. Enough is enough!
4) It is quite true that I have a long standing commitment to the building of an A2-M2 link, because this will be not only an important part of Sittingbourne's long term roads' infrastructure, but is vital, once the Northern Distributor Route is eventually completed, if we are to protect, and improve, the quality of life for people living in Teynham, Bapchild and the other villages to the south of the A2. However, I am happy to "state categorically" that I would never support the route proposed by KSP. I should also make clear that, because of the strategic nature of the Southern Distributor Route (A2-M2 Link), I believe this road must be funded by the Government and should not be reliant upon a Section 106 linked to a housing development. In essence, no Government funding - no road! I trust this makes my position (which, incidently, is shared by members of the Sittingbourne and Sheppey Conservative Association) quite clear!
5) I cannot answer for Paul Carter, and his colleagues on Kent County Council, who will no doubt answer for himself, except to say that the KCC has a duty to take a strategic overview of the county's future. Sometimes that strategic overview might conflict with opinions on a local level. Inevitably that leads to debate about the best way forward. That is what democracy is all about. In many ways it is no difference to your position in Parliament where on occasions you disagree with the actions taken by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown (such as over the war in Iraq).
6) Similarly, I do not intend to comment on the views of Swale Borough Council, except to point out that the Local Plan, which includes provision for the limited expansion of the Kent Science Park (with certain conditions) was agreed by all the political parties on the Council.
7) I am not quite clear why you are connecting my stance on the KSP with my views on the reorganisation of education on Sheppey. I have never tried to hide the fact that my position on Sheppey's education system is at odds with my Conservative colleagues on the KCC. It would be a poorer world if we were not able to disagree on occasions! I am even more confused about why you feel the need to drag my views on Europe into a debate about housing! The phrase "scraping the bottom of the barrel" springs to mind! As it happens I fully support David Cameron as Leader of the Conservative Party and I have no reason to believe that he does not support my position as the Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman in Sittingbourne & Sheppey. If David did rebuke me publically, he certainly failed to notify me of that rebuke!
8) For your information, I circulated my open letter to ALL the local newspapers in our area, as I did your short email (I assume to Roger Truelove, and copied to me by mistake) in which you asked for advice about what to do about my complaint! I also made clear to the newspapers that the original lie had been removed from your website. In the circumstances I felt that was only fair.
I have copied your letter and this response to our local newspapers, plus all the recipients of your email, including David Cameron.
Yours sincerely
Gordon
GORDON HENDERSON
Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman
Sittingbourne & Sheppey
Dear Derek
Thank you for taking the trouble to respond to my email in which I asked you to make clear where I had said, or, had written that I wanted to see 2200 houses built as part of the Kent Science Park proposal. I assume that since you have removed this allegation from your website you accept that you were wrong. It would be good to receive an apology, but perhaps that is pushing my luck!
Can I now respond on a para by para basis to your rather long reply:-
1) It is simply wrong of you to say that any housing development at the Kent Science Park has "nothing to do with Government numbers". The Government, via the unelected South East England Regional Assembly, has imposed on Kent (and Swale) thousands of additional houses. The borough council has a statutory obligation to find sufficient land within the borough for those houses. It is quite obvious that if they find land in one part of the borough (whether that be Sheppey or Bapchild) it reduces the pressure on other parts of the borough. Unlike you, I have opposed these additional houses since before the last General Election and continue to oppose them now. You, on the other hand, are on record as saying that we need an additional 5000 houses in the borough (over and above those in the local plan). Where exactly do you want those houses built? It would perhaps help the debate if you would answer this question, which I have posed on numerous occasions.
2) You once again make the allegation that I am setting one part of the constituency against the other. WIth all due respect, that shows how little you understand the battle that we are collectively fighting to stop the over development of our borough. It is a battle shared by Islanders and those living on the mainland alike. Your allegation also highlights the difference between you and me. You have opposed the Kent Science Park development, and for that I commend you, however, you have at the same time supported an increase in the number of houses being built in Queenborough. Because I happen to have consistently opposed both these developments, I fail to see how this can be construed as "setting one part of the constituency" against the other. Are you suggesting that I drop my objections to an increase in housing in Queenborough - from the 750 homes that SEEDA wanted two years ago (which I accepted), to the over 2000 that they want now? How does my support for the residents of Sheppey in general, and Queenborough in particular, detract from my support for the Five Parishes Opposition Group? Whilst on the subject of Sheppey, perhaps you would like to explain to the residents of Halfway why you want to sell off the Minster College site for housing to pay for an academy spread across the Danley, Cheyne and St George's middles school sites!
3) I have exactly the same degree of opposition (and tolerance) to the additional houses being imposed on our borough, whether that proposed development is in Bapchild, Tunstall, Iwade, Queenborough or Minster. My position is exactly the same. Enough is enough!
4) It is quite true that I have a long standing commitment to the building of an A2-M2 link, because this will be not only an important part of Sittingbourne's long term roads' infrastructure, but is vital, once the Northern Distributor Route is eventually completed, if we are to protect, and improve, the quality of life for people living in Teynham, Bapchild and the other villages to the south of the A2. However, I am happy to "state categorically" that I would never support the route proposed by KSP. I should also make clear that, because of the strategic nature of the Southern Distributor Route (A2-M2 Link), I believe this road must be funded by the Government and should not be reliant upon a Section 106 linked to a housing development. In essence, no Government funding - no road! I trust this makes my position (which, incidently, is shared by members of the Sittingbourne and Sheppey Conservative Association) quite clear!
5) I cannot answer for Paul Carter, and his colleagues on Kent County Council, who will no doubt answer for himself, except to say that the KCC has a duty to take a strategic overview of the county's future. Sometimes that strategic overview might conflict with opinions on a local level. Inevitably that leads to debate about the best way forward. That is what democracy is all about. In many ways it is no difference to your position in Parliament where on occasions you disagree with the actions taken by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown (such as over the war in Iraq).
6) Similarly, I do not intend to comment on the views of Swale Borough Council, except to point out that the Local Plan, which includes provision for the limited expansion of the Kent Science Park (with certain conditions) was agreed by all the political parties on the Council.
7) I am not quite clear why you are connecting my stance on the KSP with my views on the reorganisation of education on Sheppey. I have never tried to hide the fact that my position on Sheppey's education system is at odds with my Conservative colleagues on the KCC. It would be a poorer world if we were not able to disagree on occasions! I am even more confused about why you feel the need to drag my views on Europe into a debate about housing! The phrase "scraping the bottom of the barrel" springs to mind! As it happens I fully support David Cameron as Leader of the Conservative Party and I have no reason to believe that he does not support my position as the Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman in Sittingbourne & Sheppey. If David did rebuke me publically, he certainly failed to notify me of that rebuke!
8) For your information, I circulated my open letter to ALL the local newspapers in our area, as I did your short email (I assume to Roger Truelove, and copied to me by mistake) in which you asked for advice about what to do about my complaint! I also made clear to the newspapers that the original lie had been removed from your website. In the circumstances I felt that was only fair.
I have copied your letter and this response to our local newspapers, plus all the recipients of your email, including David Cameron.
Yours sincerely
Gordon
GORDON HENDERSON
Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman
Sittingbourne & Sheppey
So Derek did lie. His Reply
It seems that Derek Wyatt did lie and he has admitted that in this
----- Original Message -----
From: WYATT, Derek
To: gordon.henderson3@tesco.net
Cc: CAMERON, David ; paul.carter@kent.gov.uk ; leader@swale.gov.uk
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 11:54 AM
Subject: A reply to your open email letter
Dear Gordon,
I acknowledge receipt of your letter concerning housing development
and the KSP proposals.
I have had some difficulty with interpreting exactly what you meant
in a recent statement about your two "major" differences with 5POG and
in particular to "some members of 5POG appear to believe that the
answer of solving the problem of delivering the number of houses
imposed on Swale by the Government is to put them on Sheppey." Of
course, you know that any housing development in the KSP area would
have nothing to do with "Government numbers" and would only go
forward because KSP have been encouraged by colleagues in your party
to regard their ambitions as key regeneration objectives.
However, your remarks do raise some interesting issues, firstly why
a parliamentary candidate should want to set one part of the
constituency against another, but secondly as a friend of 5POG I
would like you to make public what evidence you have for making such
remarks about any of the Group.
A reasonable interpretation by any independent reader would be that
you have a lower tolerance level for housing development in the
Bapchild and Tunstall area than you have for Sheppey. However if you
are prepared to say that you cannot envisage any circumstances in
which you would support any housing development of any kind in line
with the KSP proposals, then I would welcome that.
Moreover if you (along with other Conservatives) want to reserve the
right to support an A2/M2 link road, something with which I
disagree, then it would be most welcome if you could state
categorically that you would never support the route proposed by KSP.
It is the Conservatives' lack of clarity on the road, plus the
positions taken by the Conservative Leadership on KCC about the role
of KSP in County Regeneration aims, plus the position of
Conservative controlled Swale, that makes it clear that there is a
divide between the Conservatives on the one hand and the 5POG and
myself on the other.
It does seem to us in the Labour Party that you frequently seek to
isolate yourself from the consequences of decisions made by your
elected colleagues in local government. You must surely be aware that
Paul Carter has said openly in full Council Chamber at KCC that Kent
Science Park is a key part of the Conservative administration's
regeneration policy. You will be aware that the Leader of Swale
Council is also a Conservative County Councillor, is therefore signed
up to this policy, and certainly does not publicly disagree with Mr
Carter on the KSP issue. You will surely have seen press coverage of
visits by Mr Carter and Mr Bowles to Kent Science Park and the
supportive comments they are reported to have made.
You must surely be aware of the Economic Policy position of the
Conservative administration on Swale Borough Council too, which also
gives key priority support to KSP.
It is absolutely absurd for you and other Conservatives to pretend
that the vaulting ambitions of the KSP proposals have nothing to do
with signals given by leading Conservatives in local government.
Your position on this seems a little akin to the Sheppey education
issue, where you seek to attack the decisions and actions of the
Conservative administration at KCC, but imply that they are not really
in control and that the officers should take the blame. You will know
too that we have noted Mr Cameron's rebuke to you for supporting the
UKIP inspired BOO campaign. This was reported in the Daily Telegraph
and you have never sought to make any public comment on it.
However, you have asked me to withdraw the statement on my website
about a precise number of houses that you might support in the KSP
area, and so I have done so. (This is the apology for the lie)
I note that in your letter to me, you copied in a journalist on the
Kent Messenger Group. I wonder why you did not also include the East
Kent Gazette. However, I assume you want the press to be involved in this exchange
and so I will be releasing this reply to the local press and to David Cameron, Paul Carter
and Andrew Bowles.
Yours sincerely
Derek Wyatt MP
----- Original Message -----
From: WYATT, Derek
To: gordon.henderson3@tesco.net
Cc: CAMERON, David ; paul.carter@kent.gov.uk ; leader@swale.gov.uk
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 11:54 AM
Subject: A reply to your open email letter
Dear Gordon,
I acknowledge receipt of your letter concerning housing development
and the KSP proposals.
I have had some difficulty with interpreting exactly what you meant
in a recent statement about your two "major" differences with 5POG and
in particular to "some members of 5POG appear to believe that the
answer of solving the problem of delivering the number of houses
imposed on Swale by the Government is to put them on Sheppey." Of
course, you know that any housing development in the KSP area would
have nothing to do with "Government numbers" and would only go
forward because KSP have been encouraged by colleagues in your party
to regard their ambitions as key regeneration objectives.
However, your remarks do raise some interesting issues, firstly why
a parliamentary candidate should want to set one part of the
constituency against another, but secondly as a friend of 5POG I
would like you to make public what evidence you have for making such
remarks about any of the Group.
A reasonable interpretation by any independent reader would be that
you have a lower tolerance level for housing development in the
Bapchild and Tunstall area than you have for Sheppey. However if you
are prepared to say that you cannot envisage any circumstances in
which you would support any housing development of any kind in line
with the KSP proposals, then I would welcome that.
Moreover if you (along with other Conservatives) want to reserve the
right to support an A2/M2 link road, something with which I
disagree, then it would be most welcome if you could state
categorically that you would never support the route proposed by KSP.
It is the Conservatives' lack of clarity on the road, plus the
positions taken by the Conservative Leadership on KCC about the role
of KSP in County Regeneration aims, plus the position of
Conservative controlled Swale, that makes it clear that there is a
divide between the Conservatives on the one hand and the 5POG and
myself on the other.
It does seem to us in the Labour Party that you frequently seek to
isolate yourself from the consequences of decisions made by your
elected colleagues in local government. You must surely be aware that
Paul Carter has said openly in full Council Chamber at KCC that Kent
Science Park is a key part of the Conservative administration's
regeneration policy. You will be aware that the Leader of Swale
Council is also a Conservative County Councillor, is therefore signed
up to this policy, and certainly does not publicly disagree with Mr
Carter on the KSP issue. You will surely have seen press coverage of
visits by Mr Carter and Mr Bowles to Kent Science Park and the
supportive comments they are reported to have made.
You must surely be aware of the Economic Policy position of the
Conservative administration on Swale Borough Council too, which also
gives key priority support to KSP.
It is absolutely absurd for you and other Conservatives to pretend
that the vaulting ambitions of the KSP proposals have nothing to do
with signals given by leading Conservatives in local government.
Your position on this seems a little akin to the Sheppey education
issue, where you seek to attack the decisions and actions of the
Conservative administration at KCC, but imply that they are not really
in control and that the officers should take the blame. You will know
too that we have noted Mr Cameron's rebuke to you for supporting the
UKIP inspired BOO campaign. This was reported in the Daily Telegraph
and you have never sought to make any public comment on it.
However, you have asked me to withdraw the statement on my website
about a precise number of houses that you might support in the KSP
area, and so I have done so. (This is the apology for the lie)
I note that in your letter to me, you copied in a journalist on the
Kent Messenger Group. I wonder why you did not also include the East
Kent Gazette. However, I assume you want the press to be involved in this exchange
and so I will be releasing this reply to the local press and to David Cameron, Paul Carter
and Andrew Bowles.
Yours sincerely
Derek Wyatt MP
Monday, April 16, 2007
Why Vote for 5POG?
Letter sent to EKG & KM
Monday, 16 April 2007
Dear Editor
It has just come to my attention that the Five Parishes Opposition Group (5POG) is putting up a candidate in West Downs at the forthcoming Swale Borough Council Elections with the LibDems and Labour candidates withdrawing to support 5POG. I can understand that these two parties would want to withdraw from the contest as 1) It is an un winnable seat for either of them as West Downs has a very good Conservative Councillor 2) They can save money and resources by not entering 3) they can redirect man power no other wards 4) by withdrawing they may get an independent and so cost the Conservatives a seat.
I wonder if Labour and LibDems voters in the ward will happy to vote against the Conservatives just because the party they normally support has refused to enter, most electors are getting fed up with political parties treating them like sheep
What is most fascinating is why any sensible person would vote for a single issue party? A councillor is their to represent all people in their wards in all matters not just one, single issue groups will spend 100% of there time on that issue that’s what they would have been elected on so what happens to all the other issues and what happens if an elector has a problem who is against their views? The advantage of being a member of a political party, you have the organisation machine behind you, if you are new councillor you have the experienced councillors in your party to guide you but most importantly you have the weight of numbers when it comes to voting. No matter how right a lone voice is it is still a lone voice. When 5POG where a focus group they were affective because they could utilise all the political parties but making an agreement with the LibDems/Labour they are direct opposition with Conservatives who are the governing party on SBC.
Monday, 16 April 2007
Dear Editor
It has just come to my attention that the Five Parishes Opposition Group (5POG) is putting up a candidate in West Downs at the forthcoming Swale Borough Council Elections with the LibDems and Labour candidates withdrawing to support 5POG. I can understand that these two parties would want to withdraw from the contest as 1) It is an un winnable seat for either of them as West Downs has a very good Conservative Councillor 2) They can save money and resources by not entering 3) they can redirect man power no other wards 4) by withdrawing they may get an independent and so cost the Conservatives a seat.
I wonder if Labour and LibDems voters in the ward will happy to vote against the Conservatives just because the party they normally support has refused to enter, most electors are getting fed up with political parties treating them like sheep
What is most fascinating is why any sensible person would vote for a single issue party? A councillor is their to represent all people in their wards in all matters not just one, single issue groups will spend 100% of there time on that issue that’s what they would have been elected on so what happens to all the other issues and what happens if an elector has a problem who is against their views? The advantage of being a member of a political party, you have the organisation machine behind you, if you are new councillor you have the experienced councillors in your party to guide you but most importantly you have the weight of numbers when it comes to voting. No matter how right a lone voice is it is still a lone voice. When 5POG where a focus group they were affective because they could utilise all the political parties but making an agreement with the LibDems/Labour they are direct opposition with Conservatives who are the governing party on SBC.
So Derek Wyatt did lie
Please read email I recieved it seems Derek Wyatt MP did lie
Dear All
Following my earlier open letter to Derek Wyatt, I have today received the following email (I assume by mistake!) which appears to have been sent by Mr Wyatt to Roger Truelove ("Christine" is Roger's wife and the Swale Borough Council candidate in Woodstock).
If you doubted who is the real puppet master behind our local Labour MP just read the last sentence!
Obviously, Mr Wyatt received sound advice about what to do because the "lie" has been removed from his website.
I await a response and an apology, but I won't hold my breath!
Best regards
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
From: WYATT, Derek
To: Gordon Henderson
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 8:26 AM
Subject: RE: An Open Letter to Derek Wyatt
I’ve looked at what I have written; where did he say he wanted the housing as haven’t we repeated this in Christine’s leaflet.
How should I respond I thguht the housing issue was on his web site but no longer.
Derek
Dear All
Following my earlier open letter to Derek Wyatt, I have today received the following email (I assume by mistake!) which appears to have been sent by Mr Wyatt to Roger Truelove ("Christine" is Roger's wife and the Swale Borough Council candidate in Woodstock).
If you doubted who is the real puppet master behind our local Labour MP just read the last sentence!
Obviously, Mr Wyatt received sound advice about what to do because the "lie" has been removed from his website.
I await a response and an apology, but I won't hold my breath!
Best regards
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
From: WYATT, Derek
To: Gordon Henderson
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 8:26 AM
Subject: RE: An Open Letter to Derek Wyatt
I’ve looked at what I have written; where did he say he wanted the housing as haven’t we repeated this in Christine’s leaflet.
How should I respond I thguht the housing issue was on his web site but no longer.
Derek
Sunday, April 15, 2007
WHAT IS EASTER
Easter Weekend proved to be a very sunny weekend as a friend of mine said a good holiday break but I did feel a certain amount of guilt as I sat in my caravan enjoying the sun. Why? Well as someone who was brought up a Catholic, fervently believing in Christ, and importantly I believe in the Christian Ethic and Morals, yet I never attended Mass. My excuse to myself was that I did not need to attend Church to believe in God or was I just lazy? As I began some serious navel gazing I started to look at the world as a whole and England especially and it relationships with Easter.
Most English people believe Easter is just a public holiday where they can enjoy themselves and go shopping but surely it is more then that?
Easter is the most important period in the Christian Diary it emphasises the core belief of Christianity “That Jesus was the Son of God, he suffered death on the cross to save mankind and rose from the dead” I am not trying to preach but want to put in perspective why we an Easter Break as I believe most people think it is a “Chocolate Egg Festival” Although I can understand Easter Sunday when he rose from the dead can be treated as a joyous occasion a time to celebrate, Good Friday should be a very austere day a day of great sorrow that Jesus had to suffer crucifixion. Yet on Good Friday lots of shops, cinema, tourists attraction was open, what few laws there are to govern trading on Good Friday were abused with some shops moving there tills outside claiming they were an out door market.
England is a Christian country its laws, morality and ethics are based on Christian beliefs for over thousand years so therefore why cannot this country and its government honour its core beliefs. Easter has become nothing more then a commercial excuse to make money and if you make MONEY your God you will be heading for disaster.
To finish on a more topical note if you lived in a Moslem country would you be allowed to do what we do on Easter on an important Moslem festival?
Martin Clarke
Most English people believe Easter is just a public holiday where they can enjoy themselves and go shopping but surely it is more then that?
Easter is the most important period in the Christian Diary it emphasises the core belief of Christianity “That Jesus was the Son of God, he suffered death on the cross to save mankind and rose from the dead” I am not trying to preach but want to put in perspective why we an Easter Break as I believe most people think it is a “Chocolate Egg Festival” Although I can understand Easter Sunday when he rose from the dead can be treated as a joyous occasion a time to celebrate, Good Friday should be a very austere day a day of great sorrow that Jesus had to suffer crucifixion. Yet on Good Friday lots of shops, cinema, tourists attraction was open, what few laws there are to govern trading on Good Friday were abused with some shops moving there tills outside claiming they were an out door market.
England is a Christian country its laws, morality and ethics are based on Christian beliefs for over thousand years so therefore why cannot this country and its government honour its core beliefs. Easter has become nothing more then a commercial excuse to make money and if you make MONEY your God you will be heading for disaster.
To finish on a more topical note if you lived in a Moslem country would you be allowed to do what we do on Easter on an important Moslem festival?
Martin Clarke
IS DEREK WYATT MP A LIAR?
Please read this and make your own descision, hopefully Derek Wyatt will answer if he does I will post his reply
Martin Clarke
An open letter to Derek Wyatt MP
14th April 2007
Dear Derek
You have today posted on your website the following statement in relation to the Kent Science Park:-
“The Tories support an extension of the footprint outside of the current park and their spokesperson Gordon Henderson wants 2200 extra houses. The houses would support the funding of the southern ring road.”
I know that you are worried about losing your seat at the next General Election but is it really necessary to tell such outrageous lies to try and blacken my name in the hope of gaining an advantage?
As we have made clear in all our literature, local Conservatives support an expansion of the Science Park inside its existing boundaries, but oppose any expansion outside those boundaries. That is the position also of the Five Parishes Opposition Group.
On a personal level, I have made clear my opposition to any housing development attached to the Kent Science Park proposal. I have also made clear that although I support the Southern Distributor Route (the A2-M2 link) my support is conditional upon the road being built in a location acceptable to local communities and being funded by the Government. The A2-M2 link should not be reliant upon a housing development to fund it.
As you are well aware this is a very sensitive issue in the area and misrepresenting my position in this way borders on the libellous. I would therefore be grateful if you would provide details of exactly when and where I said, or wrote, that I wanted “2200 extra houses”.
If you cannot provide this information please remove this statement from your website immediately and refrain from repeating these false accusations in the future.
Yours sincerely
Gordon
GORDON HENDERSON
Martin Clarke
An open letter to Derek Wyatt MP
14th April 2007
Dear Derek
You have today posted on your website the following statement in relation to the Kent Science Park:-
“The Tories support an extension of the footprint outside of the current park and their spokesperson Gordon Henderson wants 2200 extra houses. The houses would support the funding of the southern ring road.”
I know that you are worried about losing your seat at the next General Election but is it really necessary to tell such outrageous lies to try and blacken my name in the hope of gaining an advantage?
As we have made clear in all our literature, local Conservatives support an expansion of the Science Park inside its existing boundaries, but oppose any expansion outside those boundaries. That is the position also of the Five Parishes Opposition Group.
On a personal level, I have made clear my opposition to any housing development attached to the Kent Science Park proposal. I have also made clear that although I support the Southern Distributor Route (the A2-M2 link) my support is conditional upon the road being built in a location acceptable to local communities and being funded by the Government. The A2-M2 link should not be reliant upon a housing development to fund it.
As you are well aware this is a very sensitive issue in the area and misrepresenting my position in this way borders on the libellous. I would therefore be grateful if you would provide details of exactly when and where I said, or wrote, that I wanted “2200 extra houses”.
If you cannot provide this information please remove this statement from your website immediately and refrain from repeating these false accusations in the future.
Yours sincerely
Gordon
GORDON HENDERSON
Friday, April 13, 2007
Life On Mars? No Pet, it's life on Venus
Richard Littlejohn wrote this great article
Life on Mars? No, pet, it's Life on Venus
09:57am 13th April 2007 Comments (40)
The second series of the BBC’s time-travel cop show, Life On Mars, ended this week, watched by seven million viewers. For the uninitiated, it featured a modern policeman, DI Sam Tyler, who fell into a coma and woke up in 1973. He was horrified by the crude racism, sexism and casual brutality of Seventies DCI Gene Hunt, of the Manchester CID, who stole the series.
But what if a 1970s copper was transported forward in time? What would he make of New Scotland Yard 2007?
More....
Teachers blame Life On Mars for homophobic bullying
(SCENE ONE: Hunt wakes with a raging hangover to find himself slumped over a desk. He reaches into his pocket, pulls out a packet of Kensitas and lights up.)
Where the hell am I?
Put that out.
What?
This is a designated no-smoking facility.
What are you bloody talking about?
Scroll down for more...
I ask the questions.
Who are you, darling?
Detective Inspector Suzi Obafemwi. And this is my squad room.
YOUR squad room? Stop messing about, petal, and get us a drink, there’s a good girl. My gob feels as if a rabid badger has crawled in there and died.
Don’t you ‘good girl’ me, you patronising bastard.
Come on, luv, stop playing games. You’re not a bloody DI. For a start, you’re a tart. And you’re coloured, unless this hangover is playing havoc with my eyesight.
How dare you call me a prostitute, you racist pig?
Don’t get your hotpants in a twist, sweetheart. When I said ‘tart’, I didn’t mean, er, it’s a term of endearment, like.
Not round here it isn’t. And I’m not ‘coloured’, I’m black.
Only trying to be polite. It took me five years to learn to say ‘coloured’.
Who are you?
DCI Gene Hunt, from Manchester.
You must be the new guv’nor. We’ve been expecting you.
Sorry, luv, I don’t mean to be rude. It’s just that where I come from, we haven’t got any black, female, detective inspectors.
What, in Manchester? In 2007?
Two thousand and what?
Seven, SIR.
You make ‘sir’ sound like a toe-end in the goolies, luv. You think I’m who?
Our new boss.
But I only came down here for a leavingdo at The Feathers. Old Barlow, firstclass thief-taker.
Who?
Chief Superintendent Charlie Barlow.
Never heard of him.
He’s a bloody legend, flower. Cracked the 1971 diamond vaults job.
I wouldn’t know. I wasn’t born then.
Eh?
This is 2007, remember?
Bloody Nora, I know this weak Southern beer doesn’t agree with me, but someone must have spiked my drinks.
You certainly stink of booze.
My head’s banging like a bloody Lambeg drum in an Orange Lodge parade. Pour us a scotch, there’s a luv.
This is also an alcohol-free working environment. You don’t want to let the Commissioner catch you smelling like that.
I thought he liked a drink.
That was the last one, Captain Beaujolais.
Captain Birdseye?
No, Beaujolais. He went off to run the Diana inquiry.
Diana Dors? She hangs around with some pretty dodgy characters. That Alan Lake, he’s a wrong-un.
Princess Diana.
Who’s she? If this really is 2007, I must have fallen into a coma.
You were certainly comatose when I found you.
Anyway, seeing as I’m here, we might as well get on with it. What are you working on at the moment?
Cash for ermine.
Someone fencing stolen fur coats?
No, the Prime Minister’s been selling seats in the House of Lords in exchange for political donations.
They’ve always done that, flower. You might as well try to stop dogs licking their wossnames. What else?
There’s been a spate of homophobic crime.
Homo-what?
Phobic. A writer went on Radio 4 and said she thought gay marriages were abhorrent.
So what? There’s no law against it.
There is, guv. It’s a hate crime.
I hate crime, too. Anyway, who ever heard of two poofs getting married?
It’s all the rage. Civil partnerships, they call it. And I wouldn’t let anyone in this building hear you using language like that.
Like what?
Derogatory terms to describe members of the gay community, sir. Some might find it offensive.
Come off it. There aren’t any woofters in Scotland Yard.
Oh, yes there are, guv, at the very highest level. There’s even a Gay Police Association.
You’ll be telling me next that there’s a Black Police Association, as well.
Correct. I’m the vice-chair.
Bloody hell. Anyway, where is everyone - down the pub? I could do with a large one myself.
Out on inquiries, or attending diversity training. At least, those who aren’t off sick.
Sick? What, sleeping off a session, you mean?
Stress, mainly. Half the Met took at least three weeks off sick last year. Cost £36 million.
Jeesus. I’ve never missed a day in my life. I’d sack the lot of them.
You can’t do that, they’d sue for wrongful dismissal on the grounds of racial or sexual discrimination.
You’re kidding. What about those who aren’t throwing a sickie?
A couple of officers are interviewing a ten-year-old boy who called another kid ‘gay’. We’ve also launched a major crackdown on hopscotch. And Simpkins has been seconded to the golliwog squad.
The what?
It’s a special unit set up to prosecute shopkeepers found to be selling racially-inflammatory soft toys.
Aren’t we nicking any real villains?
DS Harper arrested a man on the Underground for carrying an offensive weapon.
A knife or something?
No, a cricket ball. And we felt the collar of a man reading out the names of war dead next to the Cenotaph.
That’s what it’s bloody there for.
It’s inside the exclusion zone, to prevent terrorism.
Effin’ IRA.
Haven’t you heard, guv, that’s all over.
Don’t tell me - Gerry Adams is the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland.
Of course not. He’s deputy to Ian Paisley.
Are you sure you haven’t got any scotch?
’Fraid not. I can offer you a tea.
Milk and three sugars, please, treacle.
No treacle, just camomile and ylang-ylang.
If not the bog-trotters, then who?
Who what?
Terrorism.
Al Qaeda.
Who’s this Al geezer when he’s at home.
International Islamic jihadists. They’ve already let off four suicide bombs on London Transport.
We should shoot them on sight. We did, guv, only we killed the wrong man. He was a Brazilian.
So what are we doing?
We’re gathering all the intelligence we can. Some of the lads are staking out a suspected bomb factory.
Why don’t we just surround the place with a couple of hundred armed officers, steam in and take the place apart.
Tried that, too. In Forest Gate. Pulled it apart brick by brick. One of the suspects got shot.
You make that sound like a bad thing. I’d drive them to the nearest multi-storey car park and dangle them off the side by their ankles until they confessed.
Don’t quote me, guv, so would I. But the Commissioner would never allow that. You really are quite a throwback.
Isn’t there anyone at the Yard like me?
Well, there’s one officer who seems to be able to do what the hell he likes, harass women, that sort of thing.
Who is he?
Name of Ali Dizaei. He’s written a book.
A book? The only thing I’ve ever written is a bent confession. Come on, Suzi, sod this for a game of soldiers, you can buy me a drink and then we’ll go out and see who we can fit up.
You’ve been watching too much Life On Mars, guv’nor.
Life on Mars, petal? This is more like Life on Venus.
Life on Mars? No, pet, it's Life on Venus
09:57am 13th April 2007 Comments (40)
The second series of the BBC’s time-travel cop show, Life On Mars, ended this week, watched by seven million viewers. For the uninitiated, it featured a modern policeman, DI Sam Tyler, who fell into a coma and woke up in 1973. He was horrified by the crude racism, sexism and casual brutality of Seventies DCI Gene Hunt, of the Manchester CID, who stole the series.
But what if a 1970s copper was transported forward in time? What would he make of New Scotland Yard 2007?
More....
Teachers blame Life On Mars for homophobic bullying
(SCENE ONE: Hunt wakes with a raging hangover to find himself slumped over a desk. He reaches into his pocket, pulls out a packet of Kensitas and lights up.)
Where the hell am I?
Put that out.
What?
This is a designated no-smoking facility.
What are you bloody talking about?
Scroll down for more...
I ask the questions.
Who are you, darling?
Detective Inspector Suzi Obafemwi. And this is my squad room.
YOUR squad room? Stop messing about, petal, and get us a drink, there’s a good girl. My gob feels as if a rabid badger has crawled in there and died.
Don’t you ‘good girl’ me, you patronising bastard.
Come on, luv, stop playing games. You’re not a bloody DI. For a start, you’re a tart. And you’re coloured, unless this hangover is playing havoc with my eyesight.
How dare you call me a prostitute, you racist pig?
Don’t get your hotpants in a twist, sweetheart. When I said ‘tart’, I didn’t mean, er, it’s a term of endearment, like.
Not round here it isn’t. And I’m not ‘coloured’, I’m black.
Only trying to be polite. It took me five years to learn to say ‘coloured’.
Who are you?
DCI Gene Hunt, from Manchester.
You must be the new guv’nor. We’ve been expecting you.
Sorry, luv, I don’t mean to be rude. It’s just that where I come from, we haven’t got any black, female, detective inspectors.
What, in Manchester? In 2007?
Two thousand and what?
Seven, SIR.
You make ‘sir’ sound like a toe-end in the goolies, luv. You think I’m who?
Our new boss.
But I only came down here for a leavingdo at The Feathers. Old Barlow, firstclass thief-taker.
Who?
Chief Superintendent Charlie Barlow.
Never heard of him.
He’s a bloody legend, flower. Cracked the 1971 diamond vaults job.
I wouldn’t know. I wasn’t born then.
Eh?
This is 2007, remember?
Bloody Nora, I know this weak Southern beer doesn’t agree with me, but someone must have spiked my drinks.
You certainly stink of booze.
My head’s banging like a bloody Lambeg drum in an Orange Lodge parade. Pour us a scotch, there’s a luv.
This is also an alcohol-free working environment. You don’t want to let the Commissioner catch you smelling like that.
I thought he liked a drink.
That was the last one, Captain Beaujolais.
Captain Birdseye?
No, Beaujolais. He went off to run the Diana inquiry.
Diana Dors? She hangs around with some pretty dodgy characters. That Alan Lake, he’s a wrong-un.
Princess Diana.
Who’s she? If this really is 2007, I must have fallen into a coma.
You were certainly comatose when I found you.
Anyway, seeing as I’m here, we might as well get on with it. What are you working on at the moment?
Cash for ermine.
Someone fencing stolen fur coats?
No, the Prime Minister’s been selling seats in the House of Lords in exchange for political donations.
They’ve always done that, flower. You might as well try to stop dogs licking their wossnames. What else?
There’s been a spate of homophobic crime.
Homo-what?
Phobic. A writer went on Radio 4 and said she thought gay marriages were abhorrent.
So what? There’s no law against it.
There is, guv. It’s a hate crime.
I hate crime, too. Anyway, who ever heard of two poofs getting married?
It’s all the rage. Civil partnerships, they call it. And I wouldn’t let anyone in this building hear you using language like that.
Like what?
Derogatory terms to describe members of the gay community, sir. Some might find it offensive.
Come off it. There aren’t any woofters in Scotland Yard.
Oh, yes there are, guv, at the very highest level. There’s even a Gay Police Association.
You’ll be telling me next that there’s a Black Police Association, as well.
Correct. I’m the vice-chair.
Bloody hell. Anyway, where is everyone - down the pub? I could do with a large one myself.
Out on inquiries, or attending diversity training. At least, those who aren’t off sick.
Sick? What, sleeping off a session, you mean?
Stress, mainly. Half the Met took at least three weeks off sick last year. Cost £36 million.
Jeesus. I’ve never missed a day in my life. I’d sack the lot of them.
You can’t do that, they’d sue for wrongful dismissal on the grounds of racial or sexual discrimination.
You’re kidding. What about those who aren’t throwing a sickie?
A couple of officers are interviewing a ten-year-old boy who called another kid ‘gay’. We’ve also launched a major crackdown on hopscotch. And Simpkins has been seconded to the golliwog squad.
The what?
It’s a special unit set up to prosecute shopkeepers found to be selling racially-inflammatory soft toys.
Aren’t we nicking any real villains?
DS Harper arrested a man on the Underground for carrying an offensive weapon.
A knife or something?
No, a cricket ball. And we felt the collar of a man reading out the names of war dead next to the Cenotaph.
That’s what it’s bloody there for.
It’s inside the exclusion zone, to prevent terrorism.
Effin’ IRA.
Haven’t you heard, guv, that’s all over.
Don’t tell me - Gerry Adams is the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland.
Of course not. He’s deputy to Ian Paisley.
Are you sure you haven’t got any scotch?
’Fraid not. I can offer you a tea.
Milk and three sugars, please, treacle.
No treacle, just camomile and ylang-ylang.
If not the bog-trotters, then who?
Who what?
Terrorism.
Al Qaeda.
Who’s this Al geezer when he’s at home.
International Islamic jihadists. They’ve already let off four suicide bombs on London Transport.
We should shoot them on sight. We did, guv, only we killed the wrong man. He was a Brazilian.
So what are we doing?
We’re gathering all the intelligence we can. Some of the lads are staking out a suspected bomb factory.
Why don’t we just surround the place with a couple of hundred armed officers, steam in and take the place apart.
Tried that, too. In Forest Gate. Pulled it apart brick by brick. One of the suspects got shot.
You make that sound like a bad thing. I’d drive them to the nearest multi-storey car park and dangle them off the side by their ankles until they confessed.
Don’t quote me, guv, so would I. But the Commissioner would never allow that. You really are quite a throwback.
Isn’t there anyone at the Yard like me?
Well, there’s one officer who seems to be able to do what the hell he likes, harass women, that sort of thing.
Who is he?
Name of Ali Dizaei. He’s written a book.
A book? The only thing I’ve ever written is a bent confession. Come on, Suzi, sod this for a game of soldiers, you can buy me a drink and then we’ll go out and see who we can fit up.
You’ve been watching too much Life On Mars, guv’nor.
Life on Mars, petal? This is more like Life on Venus.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Vineyard A report to the Press
I recently had a disagreement with a Local bar in the town over their conduct in dealing with illegal activities on their premises, namely drug dealing. The bars policy was to eject people for dealing drugs in the bar this in its self may on the surface seem to be correct accept I believe it is there duty to inform the police so that these dealers can be arrested or be released if a false accusation has been made through malicious accusation, I was also told that if ejected they are not automatically banned i.e. they can return the following day.
As a Licensee, Martial arts Coach to local children and an ex councillor this worried me so I contacted the manager who was very young and inexperienced this may explain his rude and belligerent manner my next course of action was to write to the management company of these chain of Pubs/Bars to ask what was their policy on illegal activity in their premises and 5 weeks later I got the standard answer we agree with our management but no explanation.
With the Local Council now being the local authority I made application to have their license reviewed but as expected nothing is to be done and the reasons are as follows “The Council cannot go the expense of conducting a review hearing if it has no prospect of success” so much for Due Process, so much for combating crime, so much for Swale B C and the Police protecting the Public, this country and this town are being flooded with drugs and when some one tries to stop the abuse they are ignored. So long as the Council do not spend money, so long as the Police can spend their time chasing people for being Politically Incorrect and as long as the pub chain can continue to make money lets turn a blind eye to drugs.
WHAT A COUNTRY! With the election on us ask your prospective councillors what they think! You can read all the letters on http://www.sittingbourne.org/letters_2007.htm
Disgusted
Martin Clarke
As a Licensee, Martial arts Coach to local children and an ex councillor this worried me so I contacted the manager who was very young and inexperienced this may explain his rude and belligerent manner my next course of action was to write to the management company of these chain of Pubs/Bars to ask what was their policy on illegal activity in their premises and 5 weeks later I got the standard answer we agree with our management but no explanation.
With the Local Council now being the local authority I made application to have their license reviewed but as expected nothing is to be done and the reasons are as follows “The Council cannot go the expense of conducting a review hearing if it has no prospect of success” so much for Due Process, so much for combating crime, so much for Swale B C and the Police protecting the Public, this country and this town are being flooded with drugs and when some one tries to stop the abuse they are ignored. So long as the Council do not spend money, so long as the Police can spend their time chasing people for being Politically Incorrect and as long as the pub chain can continue to make money lets turn a blind eye to drugs.
WHAT A COUNTRY! With the election on us ask your prospective councillors what they think! You can read all the letters on http://www.sittingbourne.org/letters_2007.htm
Disgusted
Martin Clarke
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
POLICE PC
An article appeared in the Daily Telegraph today from the Conservatives, I put a reply in the comments box:
Everything mentioned in the article may be true but two things have been at the heart of why we the public have no respect or faith in the Police
1) Senior Officers are more interested in climbing the promotions ladder, putting forward their political views and appeasing their political masters rather then policing without fear or favour
2) It is no surprise that crime detection and Police standards seems to be on the decrease since Political Correctness took over in the Police. A prime example is positive discrimination where a Police Officer is selected and promoted because of their Sex, Sexual orientation, religion and religion rather then their ability to do the job. The job of the Police is to uphold the law not represent society, falling standards in the Police are a direct result of PC.
Everything mentioned in the article may be true but two things have been at the heart of why we the public have no respect or faith in the Police
1) Senior Officers are more interested in climbing the promotions ladder, putting forward their political views and appeasing their political masters rather then policing without fear or favour
2) It is no surprise that crime detection and Police standards seems to be on the decrease since Political Correctness took over in the Police. A prime example is positive discrimination where a Police Officer is selected and promoted because of their Sex, Sexual orientation, religion and religion rather then their ability to do the job. The job of the Police is to uphold the law not represent society, falling standards in the Police are a direct result of PC.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Budget Hits Local Families
Budget hits local families.
Gordon Henderson has delivered his verdict on Gordon Brown’s Budget which sets out the Government’s plans for taxes and public spending:
· Independent experts have calculated that 3.5 million families will be worse off as a result of the Budget. The headline-grabbing move to cut the basic rate by 2 pence is offset by the abolition of the 10p income tax rate and an increase in National Insurance contributions for many.
· A single person without children earning £16,000, like an NHS maternity care assistant or a police community support officer, will pay more in tax, and not gain from tax credits.
· The Government is considering introducing a raft of new town hall taxes, including bin taxes to collect household rubbish, higher council tax bands, regular council tax revaluations and pressuring pensioners to sign away their homes in return for deferring their council tax bills – a ‘death tax’ in all but name.
· The Budget has hit small businesses. Gordon Brown is raising the tax rate and increasing complex allowances for small firms.
· The NHS was mentioned just once in Gordon Brown’s speech and there was nothing proposed to tackle the £1.3 billion financial crisis in the NHS, with nurses being sacked and operations delayed.
· The Budget fails to increase stamp duty thresholds in line with house price inflation, increasing stamp duty by stealth. The average first time buyer is paying over £1,500 in stamp duty, and more and more homes are being pushed into the punishing 3 per cent band (£7,500 tax on a £250,000 home).
More….
Gordon Henderson said:
“Gordon Brown’s last Budget is a tax con not a tax cut. He gave with one hand and took back with another. Three and a half million families will be worse off.
“In his stealthiest taxes yet, he has paid for his 2p cut in income tax by abolishing the 10p rate, hitting low income earners like junior nurses, and putting National Insurance up for professionals like doctors. There is nothing to tackle the crisis in the NHS.
“Worse, Gordon Brown’s town hall tax report has dropped a tax bombshell on working families and pensioners across Swale – calling for regular council tax revaluation, higher bands, a new bin tax and a new death tax on the elderly. Higher taxes are on the way - engineered by Labour Ministers in Whitehall - without any improvements in local services.”
Notes to Editors
The Budget was announced and published on 21 March.
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/budget/budget_07/bud_bud07_index.cfm
INCOME TAX CON
Independent experts the IFS have calculated that 3.5 million families will be worse off as a result of the Budget.
From April 2008, the 10 pence income tax starting rate will be removed for earned income and National Insurance Contributions will increase as the upper limit for paying the 11 per cent rate will rise by £75 per week to £745 or £38,740 per year.
From April 2009, National Insurance Contributions will increase again as the upper limit for paying the 11 per cent rate will rise to the same level as the top rate income tax threshold. The overall impact of income tax/NIC changes will cost working families over £300 million a year.
BUSINESS TAX CON
Gordon Brown has raised overall taxes on businesses by £1 billion.
Small businesses will be hit the hardest, with a higher rate of corporation tax and more complex reliefs and allowances. As Nick Goulding, Chairman of the Forum of Private Business remarked: “the Chancellor has used smoke and mirrors to disguise the fact that there is nothing in this Budget to support small businesses.”
NEW TOWN HALL TAXES
Gordon Brown’s report on town hall finances, was also published at the same time as the Budget.
http://www.lyonsinquiry.org/
· New home improvement tax: On top of new council tax bands, the report recommends not just a council tax revaluation, but regular revaluations (p.240). The council tax revaluation will mean Gordon Brown’s inspectors, the Valuation Office Agency, will inspect, photograph and catalogue every home, and every sign of a nice neighbourhood. Council tax bills will rise purely for living in a quiet road, being near to a bus stop, or having a parking space. People who rent will be taxed just as much as those who own their home. Inspectors have the right to enter people’s homes, on pain of £500 fines. Unlike at present, council tax will effectively become a home improvement tax.
· New death taxes: Pensioners face the prospect of being pressured to sign away their homes’ equity to local government tax collectors (p.259). Town halls will encourage pensioners to ‘defer’ their local tax bills, and instead pay - with interest - when they their property is sold or on death of the surviving resident spouse. Such a policy though will pressure many pensioners on fixed incomes to sign away their equity if they are struggling with their tax bills. A typical pensioner in England will face a net debt of £64,000 after 20 years.
· New bin taxes: Town halls will charge new bin taxes to collect household rubbish (p.280). Microchips will be installed on compulsory wheelie bin and new municipal bin inspectors will police every bin. The taxes will damage the environment and public health by causing a surge in fly-tipping and backyard burning. Based on Ireland, the charges will be £451 per year to collect 2 bin bags a week.
NHS CUTS
The NHS is in severe financial crisis. Across the country, the NHS is forecasting deficits this year amounting to over £1.3 billion – an even worse position than last year, and the worst in its history (Department of Health, NHS financial performance quarter 3, 20 February 2007).
Almost 20,000 jobs are set to be lost from the NHS this year (Patricia Hewitt, Letter to Andrew Lansley, 25 January 2007). In the last three months of 2006, the NHS was shedding jobs at a rate of over 100 a day (Office of National Statistics, Quarter 4 public sector employment, 14 March 2007).
…..ends…..
Gordon Henderson has delivered his verdict on Gordon Brown’s Budget which sets out the Government’s plans for taxes and public spending:
· Independent experts have calculated that 3.5 million families will be worse off as a result of the Budget. The headline-grabbing move to cut the basic rate by 2 pence is offset by the abolition of the 10p income tax rate and an increase in National Insurance contributions for many.
· A single person without children earning £16,000, like an NHS maternity care assistant or a police community support officer, will pay more in tax, and not gain from tax credits.
· The Government is considering introducing a raft of new town hall taxes, including bin taxes to collect household rubbish, higher council tax bands, regular council tax revaluations and pressuring pensioners to sign away their homes in return for deferring their council tax bills – a ‘death tax’ in all but name.
· The Budget has hit small businesses. Gordon Brown is raising the tax rate and increasing complex allowances for small firms.
· The NHS was mentioned just once in Gordon Brown’s speech and there was nothing proposed to tackle the £1.3 billion financial crisis in the NHS, with nurses being sacked and operations delayed.
· The Budget fails to increase stamp duty thresholds in line with house price inflation, increasing stamp duty by stealth. The average first time buyer is paying over £1,500 in stamp duty, and more and more homes are being pushed into the punishing 3 per cent band (£7,500 tax on a £250,000 home).
More….
Gordon Henderson said:
“Gordon Brown’s last Budget is a tax con not a tax cut. He gave with one hand and took back with another. Three and a half million families will be worse off.
“In his stealthiest taxes yet, he has paid for his 2p cut in income tax by abolishing the 10p rate, hitting low income earners like junior nurses, and putting National Insurance up for professionals like doctors. There is nothing to tackle the crisis in the NHS.
“Worse, Gordon Brown’s town hall tax report has dropped a tax bombshell on working families and pensioners across Swale – calling for regular council tax revaluation, higher bands, a new bin tax and a new death tax on the elderly. Higher taxes are on the way - engineered by Labour Ministers in Whitehall - without any improvements in local services.”
Notes to Editors
The Budget was announced and published on 21 March.
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/budget/budget_07/bud_bud07_index.cfm
INCOME TAX CON
Independent experts the IFS have calculated that 3.5 million families will be worse off as a result of the Budget.
From April 2008, the 10 pence income tax starting rate will be removed for earned income and National Insurance Contributions will increase as the upper limit for paying the 11 per cent rate will rise by £75 per week to £745 or £38,740 per year.
From April 2009, National Insurance Contributions will increase again as the upper limit for paying the 11 per cent rate will rise to the same level as the top rate income tax threshold. The overall impact of income tax/NIC changes will cost working families over £300 million a year.
BUSINESS TAX CON
Gordon Brown has raised overall taxes on businesses by £1 billion.
Small businesses will be hit the hardest, with a higher rate of corporation tax and more complex reliefs and allowances. As Nick Goulding, Chairman of the Forum of Private Business remarked: “the Chancellor has used smoke and mirrors to disguise the fact that there is nothing in this Budget to support small businesses.”
NEW TOWN HALL TAXES
Gordon Brown’s report on town hall finances, was also published at the same time as the Budget.
http://www.lyonsinquiry.org/
· New home improvement tax: On top of new council tax bands, the report recommends not just a council tax revaluation, but regular revaluations (p.240). The council tax revaluation will mean Gordon Brown’s inspectors, the Valuation Office Agency, will inspect, photograph and catalogue every home, and every sign of a nice neighbourhood. Council tax bills will rise purely for living in a quiet road, being near to a bus stop, or having a parking space. People who rent will be taxed just as much as those who own their home. Inspectors have the right to enter people’s homes, on pain of £500 fines. Unlike at present, council tax will effectively become a home improvement tax.
· New death taxes: Pensioners face the prospect of being pressured to sign away their homes’ equity to local government tax collectors (p.259). Town halls will encourage pensioners to ‘defer’ their local tax bills, and instead pay - with interest - when they their property is sold or on death of the surviving resident spouse. Such a policy though will pressure many pensioners on fixed incomes to sign away their equity if they are struggling with their tax bills. A typical pensioner in England will face a net debt of £64,000 after 20 years.
· New bin taxes: Town halls will charge new bin taxes to collect household rubbish (p.280). Microchips will be installed on compulsory wheelie bin and new municipal bin inspectors will police every bin. The taxes will damage the environment and public health by causing a surge in fly-tipping and backyard burning. Based on Ireland, the charges will be £451 per year to collect 2 bin bags a week.
NHS CUTS
The NHS is in severe financial crisis. Across the country, the NHS is forecasting deficits this year amounting to over £1.3 billion – an even worse position than last year, and the worst in its history (Department of Health, NHS financial performance quarter 3, 20 February 2007).
Almost 20,000 jobs are set to be lost from the NHS this year (Patricia Hewitt, Letter to Andrew Lansley, 25 January 2007). In the last three months of 2006, the NHS was shedding jobs at a rate of over 100 a day (Office of National Statistics, Quarter 4 public sector employment, 14 March 2007).
…..ends…..
Farmers Betrayed
Local farmers betrayed.
LOCAL Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman, Gordon Henderson, has used the visit of a senior shadow minister to attack local Member of Parliament, Derek Wyatt, accusing him of betraying local farmers and compromising public food safety.
Gordon’s attack follows news that Mr Wyatt has been pressing the Government to bring in legislation that would make farmers liable for all the costs involved with any slaughter that arises from future outbreaks of animal diseases, such as the foot and mouth crisis that affected Sheppey farmers in 2001 and the more recent case of bird flu which hit the Bernard Matthews factory in Norfolk.
Gordon said;
‘The call by our local MP for farmers to bear the full cost of slaughtering animals caught up in future outbreaks of animal diseases, is not only a betrayal of local farmers, but could seriously compromise public food safety.
‘If implemented, such a policy could push small livestock farmers over the brink into bankruptcy. Faced with financial ruin many farmers would quit the industry, which could have serious long term implications for food supply in this country,
‘More worryingly, some farmers might be tempted to simply not report any outbreak that hits them, which could well affect food safety and public health.
‘It simply cannot be right that farmers who are caught up in an epidemic, such as the foot and mouth disaster, often through no fault of their own, should be forced to pay the full cost of slaughtering their herds at the behest of the Government.’
‘There is an argument for sharing the costs, and I know that the Government is in discussions with the livestock industry to work out a suitable scheme. However, as our Shadow Agriculture Minister, Jim Paice, pointed out during his visit this week, the other side of the coin is that the Government has to tighten up border controls to stamp out the importation of diseased food, which is often the cause of outbreaks.
‘In addition the Government must give farmers a greater role in the policy making process. With this in mind, it might have been better if our MP had discussed this matter with the NFU and local farmers, before pressing the Government to penalise farmers in such a draconian way.’
…..ends…..
Enclosed:
Photo from right to left – Jim Paice MP, John Lewis, Gordon Henderson.
Below is a copy of the leading question asked by Derek Wyatt
Derek Wyatt (Sittingbourne & Sheppey, Labour) Hansard source
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the answer of 28 February 2007, Official Report, columns 1320-1W on Bernard Matthews, if he will bring forward amendments to the Animal Health Act 1981 to provide that the food producer is ultimately liable for the costs of any slaughter in the national interest.
Ben Bradshaw (Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) Hansard source
The arrangements for animal health and welfare are currently under review.
The Government launched a consultation on 'Responsibility and cost sharing for animal health and welfare: principles' on 11 December 2006, seeking the views of the livestock industry, including businesses upstream and downstream, and consumer organisations.
A UK Responsibility and Cost Sharing Consultative Forum, made up of high-level UK industry representatives, was established in December 2006 to develop structures and mechanisms through which responsibilities and costs could be shared on animal health and welfare. In addition, DEFRA is working with other interested parties and consumers.
The intention is to introduce a Bill to allow the Government to extend coherent cost sharing principles across all animal health and welfare policies. This will provide the responsibility sharing needed to establish a new relationship with the livestock industry and to provide charging powers, such as individual charging or by establishing a levy mechanism for a group of individuals or an entire sector
For more information contact Gordon Henderson on 07866 719923
LOCAL Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman, Gordon Henderson, has used the visit of a senior shadow minister to attack local Member of Parliament, Derek Wyatt, accusing him of betraying local farmers and compromising public food safety.
Gordon’s attack follows news that Mr Wyatt has been pressing the Government to bring in legislation that would make farmers liable for all the costs involved with any slaughter that arises from future outbreaks of animal diseases, such as the foot and mouth crisis that affected Sheppey farmers in 2001 and the more recent case of bird flu which hit the Bernard Matthews factory in Norfolk.
Gordon said;
‘The call by our local MP for farmers to bear the full cost of slaughtering animals caught up in future outbreaks of animal diseases, is not only a betrayal of local farmers, but could seriously compromise public food safety.
‘If implemented, such a policy could push small livestock farmers over the brink into bankruptcy. Faced with financial ruin many farmers would quit the industry, which could have serious long term implications for food supply in this country,
‘More worryingly, some farmers might be tempted to simply not report any outbreak that hits them, which could well affect food safety and public health.
‘It simply cannot be right that farmers who are caught up in an epidemic, such as the foot and mouth disaster, often through no fault of their own, should be forced to pay the full cost of slaughtering their herds at the behest of the Government.’
‘There is an argument for sharing the costs, and I know that the Government is in discussions with the livestock industry to work out a suitable scheme. However, as our Shadow Agriculture Minister, Jim Paice, pointed out during his visit this week, the other side of the coin is that the Government has to tighten up border controls to stamp out the importation of diseased food, which is often the cause of outbreaks.
‘In addition the Government must give farmers a greater role in the policy making process. With this in mind, it might have been better if our MP had discussed this matter with the NFU and local farmers, before pressing the Government to penalise farmers in such a draconian way.’
…..ends…..
Enclosed:
Photo from right to left – Jim Paice MP, John Lewis, Gordon Henderson.
Below is a copy of the leading question asked by Derek Wyatt
Derek Wyatt (Sittingbourne & Sheppey, Labour) Hansard source
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the answer of 28 February 2007, Official Report, columns 1320-1W on Bernard Matthews, if he will bring forward amendments to the Animal Health Act 1981 to provide that the food producer is ultimately liable for the costs of any slaughter in the national interest.
Ben Bradshaw (Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) Hansard source
The arrangements for animal health and welfare are currently under review.
The Government launched a consultation on 'Responsibility and cost sharing for animal health and welfare: principles' on 11 December 2006, seeking the views of the livestock industry, including businesses upstream and downstream, and consumer organisations.
A UK Responsibility and Cost Sharing Consultative Forum, made up of high-level UK industry representatives, was established in December 2006 to develop structures and mechanisms through which responsibilities and costs could be shared on animal health and welfare. In addition, DEFRA is working with other interested parties and consumers.
The intention is to introduce a Bill to allow the Government to extend coherent cost sharing principles across all animal health and welfare policies. This will provide the responsibility sharing needed to establish a new relationship with the livestock industry and to provide charging powers, such as individual charging or by establishing a levy mechanism for a group of individuals or an entire sector
For more information contact Gordon Henderson on 07866 719923
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
School Selection is wrong
Once again the Schools selection process has come under criticism as some one who used to be a Tory, no that is not quite right I am still a Tory but not a member of the New Conservatives led by David Cameron, I believe in freedom of choice. Yet in some cases choice for one group of people can mean restrictions for others and I sorry to say education is that case. I went to secondary school in the 1960’s at the time when all these so called Educationalist starting experimenting with our School and children and in most cases these experiments have failed as can be seem by standards of today’s youth. One thing in my day was the only selection was Grammar School, Technical School and Secondary Modern I went to Westlands leaving at 15 years of with a very good basic education suitable for me to cope with adult life. Yet I had no choice in those days if you lived West side of Park Road (this used to be the middle part of the town) you went to Westlands and if you lived East side you went to St John’s (SCC) and every school was expected to produce well educated rounded pupils by the time they left and in most cases they did. At Westlands there were no GCSE or CSE etc when you left you either got manual work, served an apprenticeship or went to colleges to get a GCE, also all secondary school were single sexed.
I may be looking at these events with rose tinted glasses but I honestly can not remember having any of the problems schools have today, It may not be possible to return to those halcyon days, if that what they were but the latest batch of educationalist have travelled all over the World and have said the countries with the highest standards in education and youth behaviour were those who had single sexed schools, made children sit in rows facing the teacher had codes of discipline such as no talking in class, no running in the corridors, no swearing etc strangely enough this reminds me of when I was at school! Why is it that modernisers look on the past with disdain and obliterate everything that is not new? You have to know and learn from the past to know where your future is.
I may be looking at these events with rose tinted glasses but I honestly can not remember having any of the problems schools have today, It may not be possible to return to those halcyon days, if that what they were but the latest batch of educationalist have travelled all over the World and have said the countries with the highest standards in education and youth behaviour were those who had single sexed schools, made children sit in rows facing the teacher had codes of discipline such as no talking in class, no running in the corridors, no swearing etc strangely enough this reminds me of when I was at school! Why is it that modernisers look on the past with disdain and obliterate everything that is not new? You have to know and learn from the past to know where your future is.
Friday, March 09, 2007
Col Patrick Mercer an honest MP
Can some one please tell me what Colonel Patrick Mercer has done wrong if you do not who he is, he is the Conservative Front Bench MP who was asked to resign for saying that in the Army, people are called Black Bastards, Ginger Bastards, Fat Bastards and so on, he never said he said any of those things. I thought it was rather refreshing that a politician actually told you the truth how it is and not how they want it to be. Patrick Mercer served his country for 20 years prepared to put his life on the line for us, as all service personnel do. How can National politicians judge the environment of the armed services when at best their training is done in the bars of Westminster, there battleground is the debating chamber of Parliament and the only weapon they use is when they are knifing a fellow politician in the back. Our only hope is that at the next election a new batch of MP’s are elected and realise they are elected by the people and do not try to treat the people as serfs like some feudal Baron.
Judge for yourself “Col Patrick Mercer: the full transcript script”
Martin Clarke 118 East Street Sittingbourne
Col Patrick Mercer: the full transcript
Last updated at 00:14am on 9th March 2007
Read a transcript of what Col Patrick Mercer said.
"I came across a lot of ethnic minority soldiers who were idle and useless, but who used racism as cover for their misdemeanours.
"I remember one guy from St Anne's (Nottingham) who was constantly absent and who had a lot of girlfriends. When he came back one day I asked him why, and he would say, 'I was racially abused.' And we'd say: 'No you weren't, you were off with your girlfriends again.'
"I had the good fortune to command a battalion that was racially very mixed. Towards the end, I had five company sergeant majors who were all black. They were without exception UK-born, Nottingham-born men who were English - as English as you and me.
"They prospered inside my regiment, but if you'd said to them, 'Have you ever been called a nigger,' they would have said, 'Yes.' But equally, a chap with red hair, for example, would also get a hard time - a far harder time than a black man, in fact.
"But that's the way it is in the Army. If someone is slow on the assault course, you'd get people shouting: 'Come on you fat bastard, come on you ginger bastard, come on you black bastard.'
Judge for yourself “Col Patrick Mercer: the full transcript script”
Martin Clarke 118 East Street Sittingbourne
Col Patrick Mercer: the full transcript
Last updated at 00:14am on 9th March 2007
Read a transcript of what Col Patrick Mercer said.
"I came across a lot of ethnic minority soldiers who were idle and useless, but who used racism as cover for their misdemeanours.
"I remember one guy from St Anne's (Nottingham) who was constantly absent and who had a lot of girlfriends. When he came back one day I asked him why, and he would say, 'I was racially abused.' And we'd say: 'No you weren't, you were off with your girlfriends again.'
"I had the good fortune to command a battalion that was racially very mixed. Towards the end, I had five company sergeant majors who were all black. They were without exception UK-born, Nottingham-born men who were English - as English as you and me.
"They prospered inside my regiment, but if you'd said to them, 'Have you ever been called a nigger,' they would have said, 'Yes.' But equally, a chap with red hair, for example, would also get a hard time - a far harder time than a black man, in fact.
"But that's the way it is in the Army. If someone is slow on the assault course, you'd get people shouting: 'Come on you fat bastard, come on you ginger bastard, come on you black bastard.'
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Does Childhood still exist?
For years some mothers have been complaining about paedophiles yet their 12, 13 year old daughters dress and behave like 20 year old and the brag about how their little Charlene is so mature for her age, fathers are the same with their sons encouraging them to drink alcohol at an early age and treat women as some form of sexual object (as long as it was not their daughter) can you then wonder why the UK has the highest illegitimacy number and under age mothers. When I complained I was always told I am old fashioned, children are more mature then they were when I was a teenager and young should be encouraged to experiment with sex and to have many sexual partners. Well it seems other people think like me a recent article appeared on MSM lifestyle entitled “Does Childhood still exist” I quote just a small piece
Parents have a major role to play in achieving this goal, the APA says. It has produced a series of tips to help parents lessen the effects of sexualisation on their kids. They include:
Teach girls to value themselves for who they are, rather than how they look, and teach boys to value girls as friends, sisters, and girlfriends, rather than as sexual objects.
Complain to manufacturers, advertisers, etc when products sexualise girls.
Watch TV with your children, read their magazines, surf their websites, and then ask questions like, "why is there so much pressure on girls to look a certain way?" Asking the right questions and talking to children about the sexualised images they're bombarded with is a vital way of offsetting any damage such images may cause, says Gill Mullinar, co-ordinator of the Sex Education Forum.
If you are interested in child welfare read this article.
Martin Clarke Sittingbourne
Parents have a major role to play in achieving this goal, the APA says. It has produced a series of tips to help parents lessen the effects of sexualisation on their kids. They include:
Teach girls to value themselves for who they are, rather than how they look, and teach boys to value girls as friends, sisters, and girlfriends, rather than as sexual objects.
Complain to manufacturers, advertisers, etc when products sexualise girls.
Watch TV with your children, read their magazines, surf their websites, and then ask questions like, "why is there so much pressure on girls to look a certain way?" Asking the right questions and talking to children about the sexualised images they're bombarded with is a vital way of offsetting any damage such images may cause, says Gill Mullinar, co-ordinator of the Sex Education Forum.
If you are interested in child welfare read this article.
Martin Clarke Sittingbourne
Vineyard and drugs
You may be interested in the following letter sent by mysel
Delivered by hand Saturday February 24th 2007.
Saturday, 24 February 2007
To;
Manager Vineyard
Sittingbourne
Part of Barracuda Group
Dear Sir
With reference to our telephone conversation today at 11.20am can I confirm with the statements you made over the telephone
1) My daughter Donna and her husband Scott Lawrie were told to leave your premises on Friday February 23rd after being accused of visiting the Ladies toilets on several occasions to use drugs and dealing drugs under the table they were alleged to be sitting at.
2) The accusation was made by an assistant manager who you named as Lee (you refused his surname).
3) This accusation was made, according to your manager after 3 people informed your manager of the incident.
4) Again according to your telephone conversation your Stewards witnessed this and were present when you asked Donna to leave.
Can I bring to your attention the following facts?
1) This was the first time my daughter has been in the Vineyard
2) She was with her husband and not in a group
3) The pair were not seated at a table they were on stools
4) She visited the toilet once
5) They had spent the early part of the evening having a meal then vacated to another pub and returned to the Vineyard later by themselves.
6) When confronted with the accusation my daughter volunteered to be searched as did her husband and she also pointed out that on leaving the toilets she had no coat or handbag.
7) The member of staff who accused her gave his name as Dominic Oxley not Lee no surname as given by yourself?
8) If my daughter had committed a criminal act, which you allege, why was the Police not called?
9) I believe you have CCTV in the Bar if this is the case you will have video evidence of the incident?
10) Is this the policy of yourself and your company not to inform the Police of criminal activities?
11) The Police have been informed of this incident for further reference.
Myself and my family have been actively involved the Community for over 50 years teaching various forms of Martial Arts, I have been a Borough Councillor, Vice Chairman of the local Conservative Association and a Licensee in access of 10 years so our reputation and good standing in the community is of paramount importance.
I commend any establishment for clamping down on illegal drug use but it must be legally and not on a vigilante basis. Hearsay, which is designed to be malicious and is unsubstantiated must be ignored at all time, I believe you have made a slanderous allegation against my daughter.
I await your written reply before my daughter and myself consider any further options.
Further letter
To:
Samantha Potts
Swale Borough Council
Licensing Office
Thursday, 08 March 2007
Dear Samantha Potts
Attached you will find a letter of complaint I have made to the Barracuda Group with reference to the Vineyard, briefly it makes a false and malicious accusation against my daughter, although the accusation maybe a private matter it does throw up some other matters relevant to the licensing of the premises:
1) As you can see it has been 12 days since my written complaint, to date I have no reply either by letter, e-mail or telephone. The company has shown a cavalier attitude to customer’s complaints, the recent publicity in National newspapers with reference to a hooded top proves that this is the only way to get them to respond to complaint. I believe that the public have a right to complain and be listened to.
2) If my daughter had committed a criminal act, which they allege, why was the Police not called? As a licensee myself I believe it is part of my license to report criminality to the Police.
3) The manager and his staff seem very young and inexperienced, this is obvious by the way they handled my daughters situation and the subsequent follow up. An experienced mature licensee would have approached the whole incident in a more diplomatic way and would not have relied on unsubstantiated accusations, which could have provoked a violent incident. The main manager when he returned my initial call even gave the wrong name to the person who ejected my daughter, so something like checking details of the incident was no considered necessary by the manager.
4) Could the whole incident been a ploy to cover the real activities of drug dealers?
I would like this letter brought before the revue panel on Friday, can I suggest that before any extension is issued they check the Vineyards policy on drugs, they also question the companies staffing policies with regard to age and experience, finally they should have some laid down complaints procedure.
Having used the premises on only one occasion I did find the experience quite enjoyable and believe that the Town needs venues like this but it must have the correct management structure other wise it could just become another place for excessive drinking and late night violence. I am not sure it has that management yet.
Delivered by hand Saturday February 24th 2007.
Saturday, 24 February 2007
To;
Manager Vineyard
Sittingbourne
Part of Barracuda Group
Dear Sir
With reference to our telephone conversation today at 11.20am can I confirm with the statements you made over the telephone
1) My daughter Donna and her husband Scott Lawrie were told to leave your premises on Friday February 23rd after being accused of visiting the Ladies toilets on several occasions to use drugs and dealing drugs under the table they were alleged to be sitting at.
2) The accusation was made by an assistant manager who you named as Lee (you refused his surname).
3) This accusation was made, according to your manager after 3 people informed your manager of the incident.
4) Again according to your telephone conversation your Stewards witnessed this and were present when you asked Donna to leave.
Can I bring to your attention the following facts?
1) This was the first time my daughter has been in the Vineyard
2) She was with her husband and not in a group
3) The pair were not seated at a table they were on stools
4) She visited the toilet once
5) They had spent the early part of the evening having a meal then vacated to another pub and returned to the Vineyard later by themselves.
6) When confronted with the accusation my daughter volunteered to be searched as did her husband and she also pointed out that on leaving the toilets she had no coat or handbag.
7) The member of staff who accused her gave his name as Dominic Oxley not Lee no surname as given by yourself?
8) If my daughter had committed a criminal act, which you allege, why was the Police not called?
9) I believe you have CCTV in the Bar if this is the case you will have video evidence of the incident?
10) Is this the policy of yourself and your company not to inform the Police of criminal activities?
11) The Police have been informed of this incident for further reference.
Myself and my family have been actively involved the Community for over 50 years teaching various forms of Martial Arts, I have been a Borough Councillor, Vice Chairman of the local Conservative Association and a Licensee in access of 10 years so our reputation and good standing in the community is of paramount importance.
I commend any establishment for clamping down on illegal drug use but it must be legally and not on a vigilante basis. Hearsay, which is designed to be malicious and is unsubstantiated must be ignored at all time, I believe you have made a slanderous allegation against my daughter.
I await your written reply before my daughter and myself consider any further options.
Further letter
To:
Samantha Potts
Swale Borough Council
Licensing Office
Thursday, 08 March 2007
Dear Samantha Potts
Attached you will find a letter of complaint I have made to the Barracuda Group with reference to the Vineyard, briefly it makes a false and malicious accusation against my daughter, although the accusation maybe a private matter it does throw up some other matters relevant to the licensing of the premises:
1) As you can see it has been 12 days since my written complaint, to date I have no reply either by letter, e-mail or telephone. The company has shown a cavalier attitude to customer’s complaints, the recent publicity in National newspapers with reference to a hooded top proves that this is the only way to get them to respond to complaint. I believe that the public have a right to complain and be listened to.
2) If my daughter had committed a criminal act, which they allege, why was the Police not called? As a licensee myself I believe it is part of my license to report criminality to the Police.
3) The manager and his staff seem very young and inexperienced, this is obvious by the way they handled my daughters situation and the subsequent follow up. An experienced mature licensee would have approached the whole incident in a more diplomatic way and would not have relied on unsubstantiated accusations, which could have provoked a violent incident. The main manager when he returned my initial call even gave the wrong name to the person who ejected my daughter, so something like checking details of the incident was no considered necessary by the manager.
4) Could the whole incident been a ploy to cover the real activities of drug dealers?
I would like this letter brought before the revue panel on Friday, can I suggest that before any extension is issued they check the Vineyards policy on drugs, they also question the companies staffing policies with regard to age and experience, finally they should have some laid down complaints procedure.
Having used the premises on only one occasion I did find the experience quite enjoyable and believe that the Town needs venues like this but it must have the correct management structure other wise it could just become another place for excessive drinking and late night violence. I am not sure it has that management yet.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Litter Oinks
Yesterday I was walking from my house to my Martial Arts Club, as I crossed the road at South Avenue a women in her late 20’s early 30’s crossed with me when she got halfway across the road she discarded her plastic bottle in the middle of the road, she was the typical chav, dumpy, smoking and wearing a white shell suit. My first reaction was to confront her but I thought no why waste your time trying to educate a moron and get into a argument, this annoyed me all morning when I was walking home at 3pm the male equivalent but slightly younger was crossing towards me he disposed of his bottle in the middle of the road then threw empty fag packet to the floor proceeded to open a new pack whose wrappers he threw into a hedge, all with in a few feet of a waste bin. This time I could not keep quite as he drew near to me I said, “ever thought of using a bin?” he retorted “mind your own business” my reply “ It is my business I am a Council Tax payer and I have to pay for someone to clean your mess up” by the time he was 5 yards away I got the verbal abuse as far as he was concerned he had done nothing wrong, I was pleased he was out of grabbing distance as I am not the most tolerant of people when my parentage is questioned.
Why do I mention this simply these oinks are most probably parents or soon will be can you imagine what heir offspring will be like al I can say GOD help this country because no one else wants to.
Martin Clarke Sittingbourne
Martinclarke.blogspot.com
Why do I mention this simply these oinks are most probably parents or soon will be can you imagine what heir offspring will be like al I can say GOD help this country because no one else wants to.
Martin Clarke Sittingbourne
Martinclarke.blogspot.com
Monday, March 05, 2007
Drug Users are complicit
An article appeared in the Daily Telegraph "Our failed drugs policy has to change By Philip Johnston"
My reply was as follows
This article tells us nothing new, it tries to justify drug taking in some form of degree. For years the drug user a have treated as victims and the dealer as the villain, until we realise that the dealer is the users best friend and the user is not a victim but complicit and should be responsible for their action we will achieve nothing, simplistic yes! But nothing else has worked.
30 years ago there was zero tolerance on grugs and we never had the problem what we have today surely we can learn from that. Interestingly enough th SUN had a two page article on the damage the drug trade has on Columbia and how drug users are contributing to not just Mafia style gangs but Terrorist organisations
My reply was as follows
This article tells us nothing new, it tries to justify drug taking in some form of degree. For years the drug user a have treated as victims and the dealer as the villain, until we realise that the dealer is the users best friend and the user is not a victim but complicit and should be responsible for their action we will achieve nothing, simplistic yes! But nothing else has worked.
30 years ago there was zero tolerance on grugs and we never had the problem what we have today surely we can learn from that. Interestingly enough th SUN had a two page article on the damage the drug trade has on Columbia and how drug users are contributing to not just Mafia style gangs but Terrorist organisations
Monday, February 19, 2007
JACKBOOTS & CRB
In October of last year I wrote a piece about being refused advertising space in a local newspaper because I wanted to advertise my Flats to Let for British Subjects only, I have reproduced below. At the same time I sent a copy to the East Kent Gazette which printed it some 3 months later, I have for over two decades been writing letters to local and national newspapers but this one proved to be the most popular of all. Telephone calls, letters, emails and people stopping me in the street to congratulate me on the letter I felt quite a celebrity and only because I put into words what most people were thinking.
Since that letter I have found out This government has also introduced a law - the empty dwelling management order - that allows homes which have been uninhabited for six months or more to be taken over by the local authority and leased out to someone else. Do I hear the sound of Communist and Fascist Jack Boots, can you hear the Council Officials saying, as they tear down your property door “ I am only obeying orders”
Next I had a telephone call from a Polish Lady who asked to rent a flat I told her I had none and would only rent out to British Subjects, she asked why? Firstly I said that is what I want and secondly I said I required a CRB check, she maintained that she had to have one for her present employer as had permanent residence for three years! So was I wrong only British Subject could get a CRB check the answer is yes I was or was I?
It seems that you can get a CRB if you are permanent resident in the UK but only from the time you were first granted residency so in the case of the Polish lady this would only go back three years, before that you have to go their embassy who will tell you if they are good citizen as the majority of these countries do not have a CRB equivalent there can be no guarantees.
I wonder how many organisations, schools and businesses have people working for them who have an inadequate CRB check, I think you will agree that it brings the whole CRB into question. I will continue to ask for a British Passport and check how long they have lived in this country for safety sake.
Martin Clarke East Street Sittingbourne
To Whom it may concernAs a owner of flats and bedsits I am very particular who I allow to rent my properties so I phrase my adverts in such away that I only get the right tenant. This sometimes takes time but most of my tenants become long-term residentsWith a big shortfall in housing I decided to invest in converting part of my Martial Arts Centre, the centre is a large old church, these flats are now finished so I approached the local newspapers to advertise. Part of my advert was “British Subjects Only” I was told to include this would be illegal as it was considered racist and I was quoted the following from the Race Relations Act.:HousingIt is unlawful for anyone selling, letting or managing property (including business premises) to discriminate in any of the following ways:in the terms on which a person are offered the premisesby refusing to let a person buy the premisesby treating a person differently from others who want to buy or rentby refusing to transfer a lease to someoneby refusing access to any benefits or facilities at the premisesby evicting you or subjecting a person to other disadvantagesMy first question was how am I being racist? A British Subject can be someone of any colour or race!Why would I want to put restrictions on who I want?1) I do not want any criminals in my property someone who has entered this country illegally is a criminal.2) I am looking for tenants who will be long term, these foreign workers, so we are told by the government, will only be here for a short term a transient work force.3) I do not want potential terrorists renting my accommodation, if the government cannot keep a check on people entering this country how can I?4) As by law I have to give them a rental agreement they will have to read English5) But most importantly of all as I have a Martial Arts Club in part of the building, so I have a duty of care if not a legal duty to the children who use the Club. So if I have doubts on anyone I can ask for a Criminal Records Bureaux check to see if they have any criminal records or if they are a threat to the children. How can I make a CRB check on some one who is not a British Subject? Since this government came into power in 1997 immigration has spiralled out of control but more importantly there is no check on the status of people who enter this country legally or illegally so murderers, paedophiles etc are coming into this country in there thousands.Whether it is legal or not I intend to keep on making stringent checks on my tenants, the safety of the children is much more important then some Politically Correct law.I wonder what ever happened to the English’s freedom of speech, association and choice. These are my flats I receive no government aid only hindrance, I should have who I like in my property, if this was a free country I would.
Since that letter I have found out This government has also introduced a law - the empty dwelling management order - that allows homes which have been uninhabited for six months or more to be taken over by the local authority and leased out to someone else. Do I hear the sound of Communist and Fascist Jack Boots, can you hear the Council Officials saying, as they tear down your property door “ I am only obeying orders”
Next I had a telephone call from a Polish Lady who asked to rent a flat I told her I had none and would only rent out to British Subjects, she asked why? Firstly I said that is what I want and secondly I said I required a CRB check, she maintained that she had to have one for her present employer as had permanent residence for three years! So was I wrong only British Subject could get a CRB check the answer is yes I was or was I?
It seems that you can get a CRB if you are permanent resident in the UK but only from the time you were first granted residency so in the case of the Polish lady this would only go back three years, before that you have to go their embassy who will tell you if they are good citizen as the majority of these countries do not have a CRB equivalent there can be no guarantees.
I wonder how many organisations, schools and businesses have people working for them who have an inadequate CRB check, I think you will agree that it brings the whole CRB into question. I will continue to ask for a British Passport and check how long they have lived in this country for safety sake.
Martin Clarke East Street Sittingbourne
To Whom it may concernAs a owner of flats and bedsits I am very particular who I allow to rent my properties so I phrase my adverts in such away that I only get the right tenant. This sometimes takes time but most of my tenants become long-term residentsWith a big shortfall in housing I decided to invest in converting part of my Martial Arts Centre, the centre is a large old church, these flats are now finished so I approached the local newspapers to advertise. Part of my advert was “British Subjects Only” I was told to include this would be illegal as it was considered racist and I was quoted the following from the Race Relations Act.:HousingIt is unlawful for anyone selling, letting or managing property (including business premises) to discriminate in any of the following ways:in the terms on which a person are offered the premisesby refusing to let a person buy the premisesby treating a person differently from others who want to buy or rentby refusing to transfer a lease to someoneby refusing access to any benefits or facilities at the premisesby evicting you or subjecting a person to other disadvantagesMy first question was how am I being racist? A British Subject can be someone of any colour or race!Why would I want to put restrictions on who I want?1) I do not want any criminals in my property someone who has entered this country illegally is a criminal.2) I am looking for tenants who will be long term, these foreign workers, so we are told by the government, will only be here for a short term a transient work force.3) I do not want potential terrorists renting my accommodation, if the government cannot keep a check on people entering this country how can I?4) As by law I have to give them a rental agreement they will have to read English5) But most importantly of all as I have a Martial Arts Club in part of the building, so I have a duty of care if not a legal duty to the children who use the Club. So if I have doubts on anyone I can ask for a Criminal Records Bureaux check to see if they have any criminal records or if they are a threat to the children. How can I make a CRB check on some one who is not a British Subject? Since this government came into power in 1997 immigration has spiralled out of control but more importantly there is no check on the status of people who enter this country legally or illegally so murderers, paedophiles etc are coming into this country in there thousands.Whether it is legal or not I intend to keep on making stringent checks on my tenants, the safety of the children is much more important then some Politically Correct law.I wonder what ever happened to the English’s freedom of speech, association and choice. These are my flats I receive no government aid only hindrance, I should have who I like in my property, if this was a free country I would.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
