Enoch and Joe Are Proud of Their Son...

This needs further circulation.

I've already written at length about Nigel Dawkins' socialism, yet now it sounds as if he he is sticking a national in front of his socialism. Birmingham's Tories are well known for running a command economy, primed by public spending, but Dawkins' outburst was extreme. He is going to have to seek votes at next years General Election from two of the BNP's best wards at next years election-but this speech makes our council appear absurd. Even Joe Chamberlain and Enoch who now adorns BNP t-shirts (as well as possibly that dictatorial r'tard Neville Chamberlain) the last lot of Little Englanders to come out of Birmingham and onto the national stage, embarrassing their city did not make fools of themselves like this.

*Note that the article comes from the reliably Conservative Birmingham Post.

Edit:

I'm still laughing at the bit where he called Cadbury a 'national champion'

I Think This Just About Sums it Up

At the end of the decade this picture, courtesy of BBC News Magazine, is the best representation of the decade I have seen thus far.

Redwatch Are Morons (Just in Case You Didn't Already Know)

One of my life ambitions is to get on 'Redwatch', the neo-Nazi and proud site that hosts pictures of the people they see as "race-enemies'. I quite like the idea of being a race enemy, it would make me feel that I had achieved something and that my message was getting through to the right people.

Anyway I was browsing their site, I'm slightly jealous because several of my mates are on their and I came across this image, with this caption.

Information on These Red Scumbags Will be Much Appreciated.

I'm terribly sorry but unless I am horribly mistaken then that is an image of Tony Benn and his Granddaughter, who is standing as a Labour candidate at the next election. I am rather shocked because I would have expected Redwatch, despite being knuckle dragger's capable only of a literary tone bowed from the Daily Star, to at least "know their enemy".

Come on Redwatch.

The Benn family are part of the left-wing aristocracy I would have expected you to at least know who the hell he was!

Free Book

Slightly random this.

I've been tipped off that the Taxpayers Alliance are giving away copies of their new europhobic book, 'Ten Years On: Britain Without the European Union' for free via a front organisation 'The Great Debate'.

I am inclined personally towards the European Union-although I am a critical supporter as such I have ordered my copy. I intend to flog it to a local second-hand book shop I know in Digbeth and make a few quid.

The TA or should I say "Great Debate" are giving away 5,000 copies so hopefully there are quite a few left...

Here's the link to the order form.

*Please note that I do not endorse the Taxpayers Alliance or this book-just like free stuff.*

Nick Griffin's Gay Teenage Affair

I have heard rumours that Nick Griffin's first experience of love was with Martin Webster-an unrepentant neo-fascist, 16 years his senior.

According to The Times in 1975 when Griffin was 16 he knocked on the door of Webster's flat, virtually moving in with him and beginning a two year affair that lasted until he went to Cambridge. Griffin was a lonely youth, bullied at school where his nickname was 'Nick the prick' (both wonderful alliteration and spot on), always close to his parents Griffin became involved in national-socialist politics through them.

It is however doubtful that the conservatively minded Griffins knew about their son's blossoming romance with Webster. At the time the 16 year old Griffin's relationship with the 32 year old Webster was illegal (the UK's age of consent was equalised in 2000 at 16, in 1975-77 it was 21). Ironically the BNP has campaigned against homosexuals and specifically against the equalisation of the age of consent. Its almost as if Griffin has something to prove...

We can of course add to the mix the tales which circulate about Nick Griffin's relationships with his own male subordinates-especially the younger ones. It is also important to bear in mind that other prominent BNP figures like Richard Barnbroke and Martin Reynolds have been involved in various homosexual, activities (and there just the ones that have been filmed). Now, if most people were bi or homosexual I for one would have no problem with it. However, the BNP are the cheerleaders for that part of British society that is stuck in the Post-War era. They hate diversity of all kinds, and like all bullies pick on people for what they can't help and what no one else finds a problem. I think that it is quite frankly sickening that a man who's lover would have been prosecuted for their relationship could go against a law that would recognise such relationships as fine. The BNP is home to many homosexuals-so it surprises me that the party is as blatantly homophobic as it is.

Reliability

I am inclined to believe this story, however, its reliability can be disputed. Obviously the affair was secret so only two people know how true the story is. Webster and Griffin. Nick Griffin denies that the story is true, calling Mr. Webster 'a sad old queen'. However, he does admit to having 'spent the night' at Webster's home.

Webster for his part is very keen to tell his story, this keenness combined with the fact that he was expelled from the Griffin controlled 'Political Soldier' wing of the National Front in 1983, does potentially count against him. Webster has since been shut out of mainstream far-right politics-in part because of his openness about his sexuality.

Yet, I think that Webster's expulsion from the party by Griffin does count in his story's favor. I am not altogether familiar with the machinations of the far-right, however, Griffin is a man of few scruples, and I judge him fully capable of ditching a skilled and popular activist like Webster (who once polled 12% at West Bromwich in the February 1974 General Election-a record result for the NF), just because he was worried that the secret of his little affair would get out.

...Yet another example of how lacking in principle Nick Griffin is.

Dear UK Nationalists-I Don't Want to Be Associated With You So Stop Using my Letter. Thanks

I have been rather amazed in recent weeks to find myself the darling of the far-right. I mean WTF? I always knew nationalists were thick, but come on. Actually read the letter for God's sake!

Dear Editor, I would like to start by apologising to the people of Birmingham for the events of Saturday evening which I am highly ashamed to have been a part of. However, as a moderate who took part in the UAF protest I would like to set the record straight.

I, like the vast majority of people in Birmingham love the fact that our city is so diverse and vibrant {I never knew it was Stormfront policy to give a platform to the supporters of pluralism?}. I felt that this was worth defending, especially from a bunch of trouble makers {Since when was calling people 'troublemakers' any kind of endorsement?) many of whom were from outside the city.

Unfortunately it turned out the UAF were no more interested in our community than the racists {A normal person would have got the hint by now. Your not finding any love here (I'm also talking to the pseudo-Marxist retards who think I'm some kind of Neo-Nazi meat-puppet)} many of us turned out to oppose {Please note that word.}!

The young Muslims who rampaged through the city streets were incited to violence by UAF activists. I was near the front of the rally in Rotunda Square and I saw how they worked and I saw how it got out of hand.

The UAF should have switched rhetoric when they saw that the young Muslims were getting restless and angry. Instead what they did was get increasingly aggressive speakers to talk about ‘smashing the BNP’ (who not directly involved with the protest) whilst sending agitators into the crowd, with megaphones, to whip up anger there.

Only a few members of the Socialist Workers party, some trade unionists and a few moderate Muslim blokes who had been recruited as marshals on the day, remained to help the Police calm the riot.

I would like to commend the West Midlands Police Force for their sensitive handling of the protest and us protesters during what was a very difficult situation.

However, the ten or so members of the Muslim community who stayed with the protest whilst it was settled are the true unsung heroes of the sad event{It amazes me that your average racist is so inbred as to not take umbridge at that. Come on I thought the fascist moron was an invention of UAF propaganda?} .

I never got to know their names, however, I am very proud to have worked with them in defusing the tensions that built up between rioters and Police. A true example of why our city is great.

As to the UAF well, I don’t mind announcing that I will never join one of their protests again. Once again I can only say how sorry I am that it all got so out of hand. If we had known how it would turn out then I’m sure a lot of protesters would have stayed home.

The UAF has achieved nothing except to create racial tensions were non existed before.

Yours in penance,

Josh Allen, Bournville

Has cleared it up?

Yeah, that's really supporting you. Did I say anywhere that your racist and fundermentally unbritish actions were a good thing? I think not. Read through the rest of this blog, you might find out some stuff you didn't know before about your arse-master Nick Griffin. How did he make his millions?

Oh yes, by finding work for third world immigrants-ironic that.

The English Defence League: What We Know About Them

The Basics

*Founded in around about April 2009. The group came into existence in Luton. Luton is economically depressed following the closure of much of its auto-engineering and electronics production industries. The city is largely white, however, the towns central residential districts are home to a large population of Muslim immigrants. The younger ones are mostly the third generation out of Pakistan-their grandparent's having come to work in the car plants etc.

*The catalyst for the group was the protest by a small group of Islamic extremists against the returning troops of the Anglian Regiment. However, racial tensions have been running high for years, with the BNP and NF entrenched in the town. All accounts suggest that the protesters were members of a small break away mosque, all young blokes with few prospects. About twenty of them gathered behind a police line whilst the Anglian troops marched past holding placards reading 'Anglian Murderers'.
-What ever your views about the propriety of their actions they were breaking no law and merely exercising their right to peaceful protest.


*Nevertheless the group, who are well known around Luton, came under attack from the crowd that gathered had gathered to watch the parade. They began chanting 'we pay your benefits' (rather ironic as they had nothing better to do themselves on an afternoon mid-week). They clustered around the Islamic protesters-who were now chanting provocatively Allah, Akbar. The police couldn't contain the crowd and scuffles broke out, the crowd forcing the police protecting the demonstrators back under a hail of bottles.

*The police had not turned out in force and they were soon overwhelmed. The Islamic protesters were chased across Luton eventually been corralled by a reinforced police presence in front of Luton's main shopping mall. The crowd then threw bacon at the protesters.

*The English Defence League first appeared approximately one month after the incident at the parade. It is fair to say with hindsight that the parade was the culmination of tensions dating back many years. A few years ago there was a large riot in Luton outside a Muslim owned bakery-for example. However, the parade disturbance appeared to blow the safety off. In the weeks that followed there, were a series of racial assaults perpetrated by both communities. As in the Netherlands following the murder of Theo Van Gough windows were broken at both mosques and churches on consecutive nights.

*However, the ethnic minority community-thanks no doubt to their status as the minority-suffered the worst. Luton's Sikh Lord Mayor was assaulted during a parade, swastikas and racist slogans appeared on walls across the town, a mosque as fire bombed and Asian owned stores subjected to attack.

*This period of civic unrest culminated on the 24th May in a seemingly spontaneous (although almost certainly pre-arranged) demonstration which same crowds of young, tanked up men marching through the deserted streets of Luton, past shuttered shops, carrying England flags and home made placards, proclaiming themselves 'against Islam'. Later some of their more "eloquent", or at least aware, apologists, like Lionheart's Blog and BBC Radio Five Live claimed the march was against 'terrorism', however, we can only go by the words and actions of the marchers themselves.


*The origins of the EDL are murky. Lionheart (Paul Ray) claims to have been involved with setting up the group. His main concern is Islamification of what he considers a righteous, Christian nation.

*Other founding members have more earthly, although equally extreme, motivations. Wigan Mike a known Nazi has been spotted on EDL demonstrations. Mike appears to be a character rather like the ageing neo-Nazi pseudo-intellectual in 'American History X'. The group had an internal feud over the summer which saw it being taken over by the Renton Brothers. The brothers are on the extremist-wing of the BNP with connections to C18. The brothers take over led to a split in the organisation and the departure of many of the very few non-white members. One person who left was Lionheart. However, he has now been reconciled to the group. Possibly because his American sponsors dumped him following an outburst on talk-radio about 'dam pakis taking over the country'.

*We must however, remember that the EDL's core membership is largely apolitical. It consists of working class men (and a few women) who are fundamentally disadvantaged and feel shut out of politics. Cynics would argue that whilst many of them go along out of a crude dislike of foreigners and the progressive 'elite' as represented by the likes of the TUC and Ken Livingstone in UAF, their main motivation is actually the beer, camaraderie and chance of a fight.

*This core membership is habitually Labour voting. However, as with the BNP there is no doubt a strain of working class Toryism in there as well. They have very little in common with the Liberal Democratic or Green Parties, the rural, upper-class focus of UKIP, or the petty intellectual focus of most socialist parties; with their constant squabbling. Unlike the fascist phenomenon in the 1920s and '30s there is no disaffected middle-class element. In that sense they are a totally 'proletarian' grouping. Their thinkers are of the Rosenberg and Hess school as opposed to that of Goebbels or Mosley.


In Action!

*The EDL is entirely organised online. Without the advent of Facebook their existence would be unthinkable. Most members have never met face to face-or indeed spoken to each other. Since the end of May many individual 'Divisions' have sprung up around the country, as far a field as Bristol and Carlisle.

*The groups leadership is shadowy. It appears to be led by one 'Commander Tommy' a man in his early thirties who is supported by an older man called 'Alan' who is is his second in command. The group has no formal membership structure, and little by way of a visible organisational or administrative structure. Groups appear to just emerge locally and then form their own online groups and no-doubt informal local meetings are held.

*This contrasts with most pressure groups which are either top down affairs with a membership providing funds and letter writing muscle (the preserve of fundamentally middle-class groups like Liberty and the Campaign for Rural England). Or a pseudo-Labour Party style 'democratic-centralist' type, typical of louder, but still totally legal, groups like Amnesty International and the trade union movement. The EDL is this respect resembles an all together dodgier type of group exemplified by semi-legal groups such as Greenpeace and Father's 4 Justice. These groups tend to have a cell like structure and little by way of a public image. No spokespeople, no annual conferences-just direct action and the occasional angry statement e-mailed to a sympathetic publication or blogger.



*This structure could mean two things, or possibly both. It either represents an essentially "bottom-up" approach with these groups springing into action due to the righteous anger of citizens. That is the optimists view, cynics might be more inclined to say that the anonymity of the internet and electronic communication, allows the group to organise in such a way as to confound the security services and the police. The police have frequently commented on the fact that unlike the UAF the EDL never liaise with them about planned actions. This blogger is sympathetic towards those that share his dislike of the heavy hand of the state, however, one does wonder why in the case of democratic protest it is necessary to take such a stand?


*The EDL's modus operandi appears to be, to gather where there is a football match. Ostentatiously this is because they want to see the game. However, it is worth noting that the EDL appears to have links with the; Casual United group of racist football firms. It is clear that their most violent supporters are to be found where there are matches. The EDL invariably spends the early part of the afternoon before a protest drinking, getting up some Dutch courage.

*It is clear that the protesters are worked up by racist chants for example 'who the fuck is Allah', 'shove Allah up your cunt', 'dirty Pakis out', the good old football hooligan classic 'Engerland, Engerland' and their key slogans 'we want our country back' and 'Muslim bombers, off our streets!'.

*The protest usually gets going after five O'clock once the match is finished. Although as the group has grown they have come to rely less on football matches, so now hold protests a little earlier in the afternoon. Although never before three O'clock, allowing time for the consumption of alcohol in large enough quantities. EDL protests tend to take the form of marches. The police are usually take by surprise as the EDL seldom meet with them. It is probably reasonable to assume that because of the groups general lack of organisation the EDL leaders themselves seldom know exactly how many people are going to turn up at a given protest.

*The EDL is a violent but essentially cowardly group. Their protests are loud, with lots of chanting and banner waving. However, they are easily scared, running from counter protesters and hiding behind their police guardians. It is unfair to completely blame the EDL for the violence that accompanies their protests, much of it is instigated by UAF agitators and SWP activists. This blogger overheard the UAF leader Weyman Bennett say to a prominent member of the Birmingham SWP 'it looks like you might get your revolution after all' in regards to the large number of angry young Muslim men who gathered to protest against the EDL demonstration on the eighth of August in Birmingham city centre. His tone of voice and facial expression suggested that he wasn't joking.

*We must however, accept that the EDL is in essence a provocative group. The sight of skinheads chanting 'we want out country back', the making of Nazi salutes, the usage of words like division, the racially motivated violence that follows them, even the very name 'English Defence League' suggests paramilitary, white supremacist violence. As such they are the instigator and the UAF and comrades are merely the idiotic followers with ulterior motives.

So Are the EDL Racist, Nazis?

*Racist yes-and mostly out of happy ignorance. National socialist, yes. They are instinctively socialist and anti-internationalism as well as being deeply authoritarian. Still it would be stupid to compare them to historic groups like the SA. They are their for much the same reasons as many of the SA were-but are poorly led and lack the commitment characteristic of such historical groups. If you want to see a modern Falange, Iron Guard or Italian Blackshirts look to Jobbik in Hungary. Their who we should really worry about.


*In general the EDL are an association of people who like to go out at the weekend and fight people, after drinking copious amounts of booze. They do this because it distracts from their frustratingly boring and unfulfilled lives which they have little control over. The EDL gives them a purpose and comradeship. As well as a scapegoat in radical Islam. It mirrors the rise of the various national-conservative, populist parties which have risen in UKIPs wake over the last few years. Parties which try to capitalise on the sense of dislocation people feel with the current political climate.

*A more radical party and wildly more successful party than the likes of Veratas, the English Democrats, Free England Party etc. is the BNP. I and other have devoted enough column inches to them, however, their links to the EDL are clear.

*The EDL as has been outlined are total amateurs. The BNP are masters of organisational development and campaign running. Crap politicians, but increasingly good at getting both heard and elected. The promotional skills they show are increasingly sophisticated and their use of the internet is at least as advanced as any other British political party. My guess is that they are providing the EDL with both technical and financial support. Chris Renton, half of the Renton brothers duo, is the EDL's webmaster-despite his party officially declaring that 'the party has no interst in the type of confrontation the EDL wish to seek'. This is blatantly untrue, as shown by the BNPs arms training for members and Nick Griffin's talk of 'race war' and very recently 'a second English civil war'. The stuff of Charles Manson not normal politicians.

*In a similar vein, after the 8/8 (ironically neo-Nazi code for 'Heil Hitler', coincidence?) protest in Birmingham Griffin and Derby both expressed the view that the EDL was a positive for the party as it proved 'them right' about the effects of mass immigration.

*The EDL are very clearly part of a larger trend. The white working class feel betrayed. Traditional British institutions are failing to deal with the pressure that has built up. Labour no longer backs them. The EDL suits the BNPs Naziesque motives very well. Ever since his "political soldier days", Nick Griffin has wanted a semi-legal army of street thugs, to promote the white nationalist message by force. It would appear that he now has such a group.

A Summery of the BNP's Platform

Another post on this same old topic! This was typed at speed onto a forum so I'm sorry if its not fully coherent. I might go over it again later.

That the BNP wanted to reduce the "ethnic minority" population of the UK to around 1-2% is well known. What is less well known is that they want to abolish all of the equality laws and any group that has been set up for minorities using public funds. Personally I think that is going a little to far, but I agree with it in principle. However, the BNP have another policy on expression. They want to establish a commission to investigate and prevent "political slander", making it illegal to spread lies about political parties. In a similar vein they want to 'reduce' foreign ownership of the British media, 'clear up' the BBC and launch a crusade against immorality and rubbish on TV.



In a similar vein they support extensive devolution. They want every parish or urban ward to be largely autonomous with a board elected by local people at public meetings. Again, it sounds very laudable. Until you hear that these boards are little more than electoral colleges for electing the district councils and county councils that will make the real decisions (effectively taking democracy out of the peoples hands). Another worrying thing is that these 'local boards' will be able to decide who gets what in terms of social welfare and will be able to set punishments for minor criminals (without judicial trial). Obviously a ward or parish of around 3,000 is not large enough to provide an effective form of governance in this day and age so all decisions of note will be taken by district or county councils which are answerable to the local boards-not to the electorate. When I read the BNP's paper in which they outlined these proposals I was interested to see that no provision was made for a secrete ballot for local board elections.



At a national level the situation is similar. The BNP want to create national parliaments for all four constituent nations, which will be appointed by local county councils, instead of being directly elected. The Westminster Parliament will cease to exist a new 'Council of the Isles' being established on the Isle of Mann (the BNP state that they want the RoI to reunite with the 6 counties, or at least accept the Council of the Isles as the supreme decision making body). The Council of the Isles will be elected using closed list proportional representation, thus severing the constituency link and giving people no say over who actually gets elected beyond a percentage (list PR is relatively easy to manipulate), MPs would have no independence from their party being dependent upon their position on the list.

In terms of law and society the BNP would introduce the death penalty for murder, terrorism ooffences and paedophilia. Their position on anti-terror and criminal legislation is generally unknown beyond a pledge to 'do what it takes'. They are known to be sceptical about trial by jury. There sentencing and prison policy can be best described as 'brutal'. The party's long standing commitment to outlawing homosexual acts and castrating/executing active homosexuals was recent relaxed to one of helping those who wish to change. The BNP's views on the monarchy are ambivalent.




The party supports segregated schooling and plan to send non 'British' pupils to schools that teach them about 'their culture'. Those who are seen as native shall be sent to either a Celtic or Anglo-Saxon school depending on where about's in the country it is and their family ancestry. Learning foreign languages will be discouraged whilst learning your 'native language' (which in the case of Anglo-Saxon, at least, never died out, just evolved) will be compulsory. Teaching will go back to how it was 50 years ago, strict uniform codes will be introduced and corporal punishment introduced. Membership of youth organisations will be compulsory as will be participation in 'traditional festivals' (the festivals are compulsory for all ages).

















In the economic sphere the BNP back nationalisation of certain strategic industries, utilities and transport firms. As well as the establishment of corporate enterprises which sound not dissimilar to those of Mussolini. They also want to end free trade and raise taxes.

Steve McCabe (Leveling the Score)

I am fully aware that the Conservative Party and their Selly Oak candidate Nigel Dawkins have come under a lot of criticism from me in the past. For this reason I have decided to even the score and publish a peice on Steve McCabe, the Labour candidate for our fair constituency.

Who the Hell is Steve McCabe?

A fair question, I would like to add. Steve McCabe's official biography found on his constituency site,
states that he was born in Glasgow in 1955. He trained as a social worker in the 1970s and moved to Bradford where he worked with young offenders and in child protection. He moved to Birmingham in the mid 1980s and began lecturing in social work at North Worcestershire Collage.
Elected to Birmingham City Council in 1990, McCabe was made chair of the Transport Committee and won an award for the committee's pioneering work. He was elected as MP for Hall Green in 1997.

Since 1997 McCabe has been a committed party loyalist and a blairite of the highest order. He has moved swiftly up the party ranks holding a series of Select Committee and (very) Junior Ministerial posts. Since 2007 he has been a leading whip.

McCabe's voting record

There have been few (or indeed no) times since 1997 when McCabe has voted against his parties leadership. As such it would not be unfair to describe him as 'lobby-fodder'.

His record on many topics sickens me and I do not intend to lend him my vote. According to They Work For You
McCabe has consistently voted against civil liberties: voting very strongly for Labour's "anti-terror" legislation e.g. 2005 Terrorism Act, Detention Without Trail for 28 Days (longer than in Iran, Russia and China), Control Orders and the restriction of habeas corpus. He voted for ID Cards and has voted against an Iraq War inquiry. He also voted in favour of renewing Trident and for the War in Iraq.

He has voted consistently in favour of Labour's privatisation and deregulation measures. This interestingly puts him way to the right of Nigel Dawkins. McCabe has voted in favour of top-up fees and Foundation Hospitals.

Socially McCabe has again voted at his parties beck and call. Here my support is more mixed. Whilst I am inclined to support McCabe's economic stance I feel that he mostly just acted as 'lobby fodder' and betrayed the beliefs of many of his constituents. On social policy I am pleased that he voted strongly in favour of homosexual rights, as a non smoker and a civil libertarian I am also pleased that he voted moderately for the smoking ban. However, he also voted for the Hunting Ban and did not go the whole way when it came to climate change legislation. Again this was fully in line with the expectations of his Party...

And on the issue of the moment? Steve McCabe voted strongly against a "transparent" parliament.

$Expenses$

McCabe's expenses record is below as is a link to the Daily Telegraph article on his Second Home Allowance over claim.

Expenses

Figures in brackets are ranks. Parliament's explanatory notes.

Type	2007/08 (ranking out of 645)	2006/07 (ranking out of 645)	2005/06	2004/05 (ranking out of 659)	2003/04 (ranking out of 658)	2002/03 (ranking out of 657)	2001/02 (ranking out of 657)
Additional Costs Allowance	£17,109 (460th)	£12,092 (538th)	£11,488	£14,010 (505th)	£12,970 (520th)	£14,597 (531st)	£16,276 (joint 140th)
London Supplement	£0	£0	£0	£0	£0	£0	£0
Incidental Expenses Provision	£23,103 (89th)	£27,961 (42nd)	£20,196	£17,270 (399th)	£4,157 (655th)	£6,862 (643rd)	£15,675 (329th)
Staffing Allowance	£84,464 (428th)	£74,327 (566th)	£50,952	£52,423 (638th)	£40,726 (655th)	£55,488 (582nd)	£42,909 (442nd)
Communications Allowance	£6,416 (395th)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Members' Travel	£9,399 (243rd)*	£7,745 (312th)**	£4,281	£7,721 (436th)	£6,652 (457th)	£5,844 (494th)	£4,705 (482nd)
Members' Staff Travel	£1,007 (joint 99th)	£1,263 (93rd)	£1,555	£0	£163 (joint 379th)	£163 (394th)	£0
Members' Spouse Travel	£0	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Members' Family Travel	£0	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Centrally Purchased Stationery	£1,351 (121st)	£4,063 (22nd)	£1,944	£4,850 (22nd)	£953 (276th)	£729 (joint 457th)	£752 (429th)
Stationery: Associated Postage Costs	£1,945 (379th)	£11,530 (25th)	£6,903	£13,630 (23rd)	£3,147 (248th)	N/A	N/A
Centrally Provided Computer Equipment	£1,566 (12th)	£1,371 (25th)	£1,895	£1,748 (joint 491st)	£1,748 (joint 482nd)	£1,718 (470th)	£0
Other Costs	£0	£0	£0	£0	£0	£0	£0
Total	£146,360 (332nd)	£140,352 (joint 277th)	£99,214	£111,652 (529th)	£70,516 (656th)	£85,401 (632nd)	£80,317 (485th)

^* Regular journeys between home/constituency/Westminster: Mileage £874 (533rd). Rail £8,214 (82nd). Other: Rail £311 (61st).

^** Car £1,532 (482nd). Rail £6,213 (126th).

Analysis

McCabe appears to have been a fairly effective Constituency MP (if anyone wants to contradict me please do so in the comment box). However, will he make a better Selly Oak MP than Nigel Dawkins? Dawkins strikes me as a bit of a maverick, but essentially lobby fodder. My guess is that he lacks what it takes to step into the shoes of Anthony Beaumont-Dark and Lynne Jones. Obviously I am inclined to support Selly Oak Ward councillor and Liberal Democratic candidate Dave Radcliffe.
As it stands I feel that McCabe is to close to the party leadership, to much of a brown noser, to be a truly effective MP. As it stands I feel that he is slightly better than Dawkins, only because Dawkins is untested and in my opinion lacks the qualities to be an MP even more than McCabe does. Dawkins propensity for ugly campaigning mars him in my eyes.

Introducing Comrade Dawkins

State needs a big stake in JLR

Dear Editor, 1948 was an important year for the British car industry.

In that year we had the second largest car industry in the world and in spite of a world war we had an industrial base to be proud of.

In 1948, for the first time under the new Jaguar brand name, the company launched two new models called the Mark V and later on the world famous XK 120 model. Two fabulous vehicles.

In that same year and just down the road a certain car company, which unfortunately no longer exists, called Rover launched a new vehicle inspired by the American Jeep and using readily available aircraft aluminium – it was called the Land Rover.

Thanks to Gordon Brown we are about to get a taste of 1948. Last month the IMF predicted that the UK economy would shrink by 2.8 per cent which will be the worse contraction in our economy since 1948.

Gordon Brown’s policy of reckless borrowing is projected to leave the economy saddled with more debt than we had in 1948, and that was after we had fought and won the Second World War.

Sixty years later we now have a relatively small car industry that is almost entirely foreign owned. This country produces about 1.5 million cars a year and that production is overwhelmingly dominated by the three Japanese manufacturers Nissan, Honda, Toyota and the German manufacturer BMW.

This almost exclusive foreign ownership of our car industry is yet another reason why this country is so ill prepared for Labour’s recession.

As the financial crisis gets worse, we will all be forced to watch as these foreign owned companies begin to shut down or reduce car production in the UK.

This government has had plenty of warning of this over the last 10 years about the dangers of foreign ownership but has done nothing to reverse this trend. They chose to let Rover go to the wall and they stood passively by while Jaguar and Land Rover were passed from pillar to post by foreign car companies. Owned by BMW when Labour came to power in 1997, then sold to Ford in 2000 and now sold to TATA last year.

At the same time over the last 10 years we have seen how other foreign car companies have retreated to protect their own home production.

This government has watched passively as Dagenham closed, as Browns Lane closed, as Ryton Closed and as Vauxhall at Luton closed.

That is why the Government has been floundering over the last two months in response to calls for help from Jaguar Land Rover.

They simply have no idea what they to do when confronted with the problems of trying to support foreign owned car companies.

For two months we have had mixed messages – Gordon Brown saying he will do what he can to help and Peter Mandelson saying he will not let Jaguar Land Rover fail.

These are all empty words and promises that will be shown to have little substance.

If Peter Mandelson says Jaguar Land Rover will not fail what will he do when TATA tries to move production of the Defender model to India which will be a likely option for them in the future? Will Peter Mandelson try to stop it? If TATA moves the Freelander model from Merseyside to Slovakia to reduce production costs, again a serious option for TATA will Peter Mandelson stop that? Of course he won’t, TATA will do what is best for TATA. We have allowed Jaguar Land Rover to fall into foreign hands and the loss of control is the price we will pay

Our European competitors do things differently, of course they don’t hand their industry over to foreign companies.

The French and the Germans have not dithered for months, they have acted immediately in the national interest and offered huge financial support packages to their national car makers.

The national German car industry employees about two million people and makes about five million cars. They have put massive loans and subsidies already into their car industry and have introduced a scheme to give new buyers a £2.5K subsidy to buy a German car.

The French car industry produces about three million cars per year, employs over two million people and has already announced a huge range of assistance including a £1,000 subsidiary to buy a French car.

The French Government has even hinted that they may take a stake in their own car industry.

What companies does this government chose to take a stake in – it pours billions into the banks.

They then put another £12 billion into a crazy wasted VAT reduction scheme.

If this Government had the slightest idea how to support manufacturing in general or the car industry in particular then they should have bought Jaguar Land Rover last Match from Ford instead of letting it go to TATA. The price tag then was £500 million – that’s about £33K for each of its employees. That would have been a bargain.

They could have then have put perhaps £3 billion into a development fund to built up the company and then floated it off ten years later ensuring that it remained British.

It’s not too late. Forget about European rules on state aid, the Germans and the French have.

This Government should seek to take a large stake in Jaguar Land Rover, perhaps even purchasing it and be prepared to make the necessary investment to build up the range of models.

Coun Nigel Dawkins,
Birmingham City councillor for Bournville,
Cotteridge and Stirchley.

Well, I must say I never though I'd see the day when Tory would want the state to buy a failed company. The reason that Jaguar-Land Rover keeps being put up for sale is because it is not a viable business. Dawkins is a member of the party that ran down the car industry in the first place. He is standing to represent the party that sold the remains of the British car industry to a German firm, I'm sorry but how dare he complain.

This Blogger is not a fan of neither the Thatcher or major governments but lets put this in perspective. It is an accepted part of mainstream economics that industries come and go. Both of Britian's leading party have form when it comes to nationalising failing industries. The labour Party started the trend when they went messing with coal in 1948. Labour compounded this in the 1960s by taking control of the steel industry and thus sealing the fate of British heavy industry (the contribution of Harold MacMillian who's Mussolinite corporatism saddled British industry with inefficient poorly sited plants and gave both workers and employers a raw deal in collective bargaining). The Conservatives soon got in on the action by nationalising large chunks of the aviation and ship building industries. Ship building like coal mining had been in decline since the 1890s, but aviation wasn't doing to badly.

Lets look at the car industry in more detail. I am inclined to agree with Counsellor Dawkins that in 1948 the British car industry was in a state of some strength. The ravages of war and the level of industrial development in the UK circa 1948 relative to the rest of the world meant that in 1948 the British car industry was second only to the American.

In 1948 Italy and France were recovering from war and their national car industries were a shadow of what they are today, the mighty German car industry is almost entirely a post-war construct. Volkswagon didn't produce cars in any volume until 1949, the year of the foundation of the Federal Republic. the rest of the world offered no competition, the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe (with the notable exception of Czecholslovakia) were light years behind the West. In the Far East China was experiencing civil war, Japan was a semi-industrialised American colony, South Korea was almost entirely rural. The current success stories of motor production Mexico, Turkey, Iran, Egypt barely had paved roads.

In such an economic climate is it really surprising that the UK's car industry was in such good shape? I don't wish to knock the British car industry unfairly but I think that in the 1950s a heavily protected market led to a degree of complacency that bled commercial flops. Even the iconic Mini could only be produced by the BMC at a lose!

The death knell came in the 1960s with state interference. the Planning Board bankrupted the successful Hillman company by forcing them to move production from the West Midlands to an undeveloped part of Scotland. Likewise; Tony Benn's 1969 merger of the two main players the British Motor Corporation and the Austin Motor Company into British Leyland proved a disaster. The two companies proved impossible to integrate, unionists made restructuring impossible thus destroying the entire industry, duplication and design problems lead to financial meltdown and a dwindling customer base. Leyland just could not compete with the cheaper, better engineered and styled cars from Europe and Japan. We have seen the same thing in the USA with GM, Ford and Chrysler. Then as now nationalisation beckoned...

The Thatcher Government starved the car industry of funds-however, they did try to salvage what remained in the former of Rover Group. Unfortunately Rover Group failed because a company of its size just couldn't stay afloat in the world of modern mass manufacturing. The reason that Rover passed out of British hands was simple. There simply was no longer, the skill capital, or desire to keep a substantial car industry.

The Reckoning

The job of government is to protect the people. With the peoples consent government acts as an arbitrator in disputes through the courts and Police, thus enabling the peace to be kept. The rule of law enables people to govern themselves. The state gets it's power from the people. The only legitimate base for state power is that the people have devolved their powers to the government. The Government has a defensive role-this defence can be extended to health and social security in the form of mandatory insurance.

The Government has no place in industry. Industry is the providence of the private citizen. The Conservative Party has historically had a greater measure of respect for the private citizen than the Labour Party. It would appear that Nigel Dawkins wishes to cash this inheritance in at the pawnshop of broken policy.

It is now recognised that the UK was never a great manufacturing nation. Britian has never had a trade surplus. Today manufacturing nations like Germany have trade surpluses of 150 Billion Euros a year. In 1900 the UK had a trade deficit equal to over £16 billion in today's money, the national income was about £400 billion a year (2008 £). The country have a massive trade deficit that was plugged by the financial service industry and shipping. The same is true today. Manufacturing contrary to popular opinion has not declined, it has merely grown more slowly than the rest of the economy. In 2006 the UK exported nearly £450 billion worth or manufactured goods, that's more than ever before.

The UK's industrial economy has been changing for a long time. Government intervention merely makes the pains of adjustment worse. If the coal industry had been allowed to decline gracefully instead of being left to slump, maybe the coal mining communities would have been able to us their own ingenuity to adapt and improve their own lives immeasurably. Likewise government intervention in the steel and car making industries succeeded; not in helping the poor by giving them jobs but adding to their ranks by running down the industry so it couldn't compete with Europe, East Asia and Brazil.

Governments can't run companies. Governments are kept in power by voters. They can't make hard decisions that affect their workers when their workers are their bosses and pay their wages! They are in power for just over a decade at most and thus can't think about the long term. This short sightedness is great for running a county. We want leaders on their toes. We want business' on their toes, however that is business' problem not Gordon Brown's!

A Proposal

If a successful firm like TATA can't make a go of Jaguar Land Rover I don't think anyone can. Dawkins concern for his constituents and the countries manufacturing base is admirable but miss placed. If the UK is to survive in the new economy it must move up the value chain. The engineers at Jaguar Land Rover have valuable skills that can be put to use in new firms which are viable for the next century. There is no point propping up outdated sunset industries in an overcrowded market. If the Government gives Jaguar have a billion this year it will have to give it another half a billion next year and every year. Is it really worth it? Why not give that half billion to a new West Midlands County Council (like the one that existed before Thatcher destroyed our local government)? The council could set up a new bank to support local industry. A bank that charges low interest and gives generous loans. It could underwrite new industries. New industries that will see the West Midlands made a manufacturing powerhouse once more.

I'm talking about new technologies like wind turbines and fuel cells. Highly skilled precision industries, a thousand new metal bashing shops, independent and creating real communities around those who work their.

Why throw good money after bad? If Jaguar falls give the workers a hand up not a hand out.

Don't vote Tory 2010 if you support free markets and hard work!