Forum Topics

CHEAP GOT CHEAPER

Cheap got cheaper.  I pointed out how cheap it was of Rupa Huq to make political capital out of the stabbing that occurred near me home.  It was all to do with “the cuts”.  Here we go again.  Two people murdered by a moslem terrorist.  First Khan, the mayor not the moslem terrorist, tells us how wonderful Diversity is.  Some people hate it, he said. Little wonder when it yields an individual such as Kahn. Then we have Labour laying the blame for his release and so the murders on cuts in the funding of prisons and the probation service.   The blame for the incident was Kahn.  He was evil.   Not a word one hears too often today.  Instead we have excuses.   In this case in the Guardian from Kahn’s lawyer.   “He requested intervention by a deradicaliser when he was in prison, Sharif said”.Might that have been because he wanted to look good as he was intending to appeal? “The only option was the probation service ….  Probation do a good job with conventional offenders but they can’t deal with ideological offenders.”They can deal with ALL inmates according the obligation of their role,  which is not to discuss interpretations of religions.   For that, inmates have representatives of various religions available.    I cannot believe Kahn did not have access to an Imam during his years of imprisonment.  If he did, then the statement that “the only option was the probation service” is a false statement.His lawyer claims he “accepted his understanding of Islam was deficient” but “extremists may have targeted him to be regroomed after release from jail”. It’s those groomers again, never the responsibility of the individual.And what was his understanding of Islam?  And what is the proper understanding of Islam, according to its Scholars?  When they make up their minds, they will be able to tell us.   For now, the politically convenient understanding is that it the religion of peace.  

Andrew Farmer ● 2480d0 Comments ● 2480d

Is Ealing Central and Acton a safe seat for Labour?

I've had a number of conversations in the area about what seems likely to be a general election in the near future. Nearly everybody I have spoken to voted Labour in the last election, these included not just life-long Labour party supporters but dyed in the wool Tories and floating voters.The reasons were various but boiled down to three main factors with Brexit being the main one obviously. The other factors most often mentioned were Theresa May's social care plans and the belief that there was zero chance of Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister.Given that Rupa Huq is widely acknowledged to be a good constituency MP and she won a massive majority last time out it may seem preposterous to think in terms of her not winning at the next vote. However, it shouldn't be forgotten that she previously held the seat with a tiny majority and it was initially expected that she might not win.My unrepresentative sample suggests that circumstances this time will deprive her of some of the votes she had before. Jeremy Corbyn being prime minister is a much more likely scenario which means that disaffected Tories and many habitual Labour voters are not going to back her. Also her huge majority was in large part a protest vote against Brexit. Although her personal record on the subject is impeccable, her party's is not and many people wanting to signal support for remaining in the EU are going to vote Lib Dem. Plus this time the Greens will probably stand losing her more votes.Whether or not these changes are enough to put the seat at risk is debatable but Rupa probably needs to brace herself for a much reduced majority. It will be interesting to see the resources the Tories committ to the constituency because they will probably need a few surprise results to form a government and no doubt Dominic Cummings is looking very closely at all the data.

Andy Jones ● 2559d46 Comments ● 2484d

Equality Trust Pledge - Where are the Torys?

The Equality Trust was founded in 2009 to examine the effects of inequality on society and, following the significant findings, is now funded by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.Great inequality is the scourge of modern societies. The Equality Trust has provided the evidence on each of eleven different health and social problems: physical health, mental health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, trust and community life, violence, teenage births, and child well-being. For all eleven of these health and social problems, outcomes are very substantially worse in more unequal societies. They have also checked the relationships wherever possible in two independent test beds: internationally among the rich countries, and then again among the 50 states of the USA. In almost every case they have found the same tendency for outcomes to be much worse in more unequal societies in both settings.During this election period the Trust has asked parliamentary and local council candidates to show they're committed to reducing income inequality by signing the following statement:"Compelling new evidence presented by The Equality Trust shows that more equal societies - those with a narrower gap between rich and poor – are more cohesive, healthier, suffer fewer social problems and are more environmentally sustainable. In view of these findings I am committed to making the UK a more equal society as the most effective means of building a better society. I will therefore actively support the case for policies designed to narrow the gap between rich and poor; and engage with the debate on which measures should be implemented to achieve that aim."The 290 pledges given so far (Sat 10th) give us an interesting picture. The percentages by party I have discovered are: Green Party: 36%Liberal Democrats: 32%Labour: 21%Conservative: 7%Other: 4%Readers can draw their own conclusions from this and some candidates may say that they were unaware of the pledge which is in any case telling.The question for me is if so few conservatives are unaware or unwilling to make this pledge how can the Tory’s “Big Society” idea really be the panacea that David 's Cameron talks about?However I do welcome the upper limit for the public sector announced by the Tory at 20 times that of the lowest paid. However, if this is to have any real impact (20 times has little impact) it should be set at 10 times as set by the Greens for both the private and public sectors. To my mind the “Big Society” can only succeed without the “Great Inequality”.http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/ C BRYANhttp://conradbryan.blogspot.com/

Conrad Bryan ● 5989d27 Comments ● 2486d

Does Rupa Huq Car?

Dear Rupa Huq, Do you care? I wrote to you some time ago about a neighbourhood problem:  a landlord with an appalling record and a council officer who, knowing his record, licensed him as a fit and proper person to have control of an HMO.   I received an automated respond but nothing more.  I felt that, because there was criticism of the Labour Local Authority in my email, you were putting your party before the safety of the lives of your constituents.Here is a chance to redeem yourself.  I am putting the matter to you again. THE BAD LANDLORD:  ThamesHouse Property Ltd.  For several years the landlord had been using his property (354-6 Uxbridge Road) as an HMO without planning consent.   The tenants were housed in damp rooms with cracked, mouldy walls; the smoke-alarm was taped over; the fire escape route was blocked and there were no proper fire-doors.   THE COUNCIL OFFICER Mark Wiltshire Wilshire knew all this.  He also knew the tenants were causing neighbourhood nuisance.  He was supplied with evidence that the landlord had admitted it but was doing nothing about it.  He had over thirty statements from neighbours setting out the antisocial behaviour they were suffering from the tenants: drunken noise within the building and a squalid business they were operating in the street outside, polluting the air with engines left running, fouling the road with empty food cartons and intimating passers-by. Wiltshire licensed this landlord as a fit and proper person to have control of large-scale HMO. As a candidate for the social-justice Labour Party that claims to care for “generation rent”, will you condemn this landlord, whose record was of a merchant in filth and fire-hazard, as unfit to have control of a large-scale HMO and unwelcome in our Borough and will you condemn the council officer, who ignored his record and who know rejoices in the title Director of Safer Communities, as unit to hold office? And BEFORE the election would be nice, JUST TO SHOW THAT YOU CARE.I am copying this to the local Labour Party as I am not clear whether you are receiving emails via Westminster. Andrew Farmer

Andrew Farmer ● 2502d32 Comments ● 2490d