Twitter Updates
Twitter Updates
- We’ve got to many people who are career politicians no roots in the party.
- well done Hazel.It’s about time the party woke up & smelt the coffee.
Read my post sent early today about Labour Councillors in Salford!!!!!
Daily Archives: May 3, 2009
Any views i found this looking through the net on the BNP.
|
|
Racism is at the very heart of the British National Party. It is racism that separates it from any other political party. And it is racism that attracts many of its members. Of course the BNP denies this. It knows how hateful its views appear, and has tried to make its language less crude. But the song remains the same. BNP publications are still filled with racist articles, lies about immigration and asylum, and distorted figures in an attempt to portray black people as criminals and dole scroungers. Today, the BNP has dropped its policy of compulsory repatriation and replaced it with a voluntary scheme. Make no mistake about it, this move is designed to win over supporters. The party recognise that the vast majority of people found its previous policy abhorrent. But the small print of BNP policy makes clear its true aims. The BNP claims that a BNP led government would consider forcible repatriation if not enough “non-whites” took up its offer. If the BNP does not publicly support compulsory repatriation, it makes no attempt to hide its backing for an apartheid state in Britain. Current party literature proposes to “protect and preserve the racial and cultural integrity of the British people – and of others too, the party believes in separation”.
Privately, the BNP leaders have continued to air their real political views. “All black people will be repatriated, even if they were born here”, BNP leader Nick Griffin told Wales on Sunday in 1996. “We must preserve the white race, because it has been responsible for all the good things in civilisation”.
The BNP says they have no truck with “race hate”. Another outrageous lie. The jokes, caricatures, cartoons and articles depict black people as stupid, criminally minded and ugly. Time and again, BNP publications talk about the genetic superiority of the white race. Several BNP members have put this racism into practice:
On other occasions, the BNP has glorified racist attacks. In 1991, the BNP newspaper gloated after several BNP supporters stabbed an African immigrant at London Bridge station. The victim had his “kidney surgically removed”, the paper boasted. In the same year, the BNP leadership whipped up a racist riot in Bermondsey, London, and led an attack on an anti-racist meeting that was protesting against the BNP headquaters in Welling. Thirteen people needed hospital treatment. A BNP presence has almost always culminated in “race hate”. When Derek Beackon was elected as a BNP councillor in Millwall, racist attacks in the area soared by 300%
|
The Politics
Racist party
According to the BNP 2001 general election manifesto, “native Britons”, who they claim can only be white, would be given priority in the job market. “Non-whites” would instantly become second class citizens in Britain. 
TOP
BACKGod this scared me…
More good stuff from Steve Kingston and the salford star
|
|
|
Star date: May 3rd 2009 More Hazel Hypocrisy Writing in today’s Observer newspaper, Hazel Blears, Salford MP and Minister for Communities, is still waffling on about being “in tune and in touch with people” and “effective communications”. The Salford Star, still waiting for a reply to an open letter sent to her six months ago, says `Put up or Shut up!’ |
 |
Oh no, not again…Hazel Blears in today’s Observer is still banging on about giving local people more power. She writes that the recession “should be the catalyst for more decentralisation of power to citizens and communities”. Yeah, well, we wrote to her six months ago asking how an award winning community magazine that gives people a voice can get funding to give “people more power” and she still hasn’t replied. Now that magazine, the Salford Star, is no longer in print and has to function online, while two thirds of people in her own constituency don’t have access to the net. “All too often” she adds “we announce new strategies…or launch new documents…that are received by the public with incredulity at best and, at worst, with hostility”…Yeah, well, wasn’t it Hazel who launched the Communities In Control: Real People Real Power document saying that “a strong independent media is a vital part of any democracy” and then didn’t answer our letter on how she was going to do this? No wonder her hype is met by “hostility”. She continues: “People want to look their politicians in the eyes and get their anger off their chests. We need a ministerial “masochism strategy”, where ministers engage directly and hear the anger first hand”. She won’t even acknowledge our second hand e-mailed anger. Hazel writes about “setting up a stall in the town centre” to “engage” with voters – we dare her right here, right now to set up a stall in Salford Precinct…and actually tell people when she’s going to be there, not just the camera people. She concludes by saying that “we need to sound…a little more human”. People might believe this stuff if she put it into practice on her own doorstep. So yet again… Dear Hazel How can you ignore a letter from your own constituents for six months asking about your policies and still come out with this tripe? With attitude and love xxx |
Life in Salford waste of money, this attack from one Lib Dem hits it right on the nail.
| Further ructions for Salford’s LIFE with ‘propaganda‘ resignation | | Print | | Email to a friend |
| Thursday, 06 November 2008 | |
|
var sbtitle=encodeURIComponent(“Further ructions for Salford’s LIFE with ‘propaganda’ resignation”); var sburl=decodeURI(“http://www.how-do.co.uk/north-west-media-news/north-west-publishing/further-ructions-for-salford%92s-life-with-’propaganda’-resignation-200811063941/”);var sburl=sburl.replace(/amp;/g, “”);sburl=encodeURIComponent(sburl); The expansion plans, and to an extent the integrity, of Salford Council’s LIFE IN Salford publication have been dealt yet another blow, courtesy of a high profile attack from Lib Dem councillor Steve Cooke. Cooke has chosen to resign from the editorial board of the publication in a scathing open letter (published in full below) in which he refers to LIFE as “a propaganda vehicle” and “an often misleading and relentlessly and unjustifiably upbeat publication.” Cooke also rubbishes the board itself, noting: “It is my firm opinion that the editorial board exists solely to provide a thin veneer of democratic respectability.”  His move comes against a background of growing concern about the council’s motives for the proposed £175k expansion of the magazine. The Salford Star’s Stephen Kingston has been one of the vocal opponents of the plans. The letter in full: Recent events have caused me to reconsider my membership of the Life in Salford Editorial Board. I have decided that I am not longer prepared to be complicit in providing the illusion that Life in Salford is anything other than a propaganda vehicle for the Cabinet. The editorial board has next to no editorial control over the content of Life; no say in its distribution, size or business model (as Cllr. Marry has been so keen to demonstrate). The board meets rarely and meetings are not minuted; there are no terms of reference; and the board appears to have no powers. In short, it is utterly pointless. It is my firm opinion that the editorial board exists solely to provide a thin veneer of democratic respectability to an often misleading and relentlessly and unjustifiably upbeat publication. I, and the Lib Dem group, believe that the board should either be scrapped altogether or radically overhauled. Unless the board is suitably reformed the Lib Dem group will boycott the editorial board and play no further part in legitimising council propaganda. Yours, Cllr. Steve Cooke, Deputy Leader of the Lib Dem Group
|
The first cracks in Gordon Brown’s cabinet appear today Go Hazel Girl Go first thing she as said i agree with
After a disastrous week in which the prime minister suffered his first Commons defeat and was forced into a humiliating retreat over MPs’ expenses, the communities secretary, Hazel Blears, openly criticises the government’s handling of the Gurkhas issue and says that voters no longer believe many of its big policy announcements.
In a clear reference to the prime minister, who has been ridiculed for his appearance on YouTube, the strongly Blairite cabinet minister says such use of “new media” by politicians is far less effective than old-fashioned campaigning. “YouTube if you want to,” she says in an article in today’s Observer. “But it is no substitute for knocking on doors or setting up a stall in the town centre.”
However, it is her savage criticism of the government’s failure to connect with the instincts of the British people that is most devastating. On the issue of the Gurkhas’ rights to settle in this country, she says the government put itself “on the wrong side of the British sense of fair play, and no party can stay there for long without dire consequences”.
While she says Brown will lead the party into the next election and that Labour has the “right policies”, she argues that the government has to appear more “human”. “Labour ministers have a collective responsibility for the government’s lamentable failure to get our message across,” she says.
“All too often we announce new strategies, five-year plans, or launch new documents, often with colossal price tags attached, which are received by the public with incredulity at best and at worst hostility. Whatever the problems of the recession, the answer is not more government documents or big speeches.”
Most ministers, and a majority of Labour MPs, are playing down suggestions that Brown could face a leadership challenge, or be asked by a cabinet delegation to step down, if Labour suffers a mauling in local and European elections on 4 June. Blears’s remarks nonetheless reflect growing disquiet at all levels of the party.
Up to now, cabinet ministers have remained studiously loyal to Brown, despite a terrible month that saw the sacking of his political adviser Damian McBride for trying to smear leading Tories, widespread criticism of the budget and chaos over Gurkhas’ rights and MPs’ expenses.
Now the Blears intervention suggests that discipline is breaking down. A senior party figure said Blears was “making her move” and believed she could lead the party. “She thinks she is the one. She is part of a very active rightwing faction within the party which has a lot support among women MPs and in the student wing. She knows precisely what she is doing. You have to say she is brave.”
The former education secretary, Ruth Kelly, writing for the Observer’s website, joins Blears in demanding a greater focus on domestic reform, in a further sign of anxiety and unrest among Blairites.
Kelly stood down from the cabinet last year amid rumours that was she was unhappy with Brown’s leadership, but has done nothing to criticise the prime minister since. Now she says: “Somehow in the immediacy of the economic crisis, New Labour’s strong message on public service reform, on devolution and on climate change has got lost in the fog.”
Last night Blears, whose comments will infuriate No 10, hastily put out a statement that she had not intended them as a criticism of Brown.
“I want to make it clear that the Prime Minster enjoys my 100% support. Any suggestion that I intended what I wrote as criticism of him or his leadership is completely wrong,” she said.
With Brown’s problems piling up, pressure is also growing on ministers to drop controversial plans to part-privatise Royal Mail, which are opposed by more than 120 Labour MPs. The legislation is due to return the Commons days after the European and council polls.
Government sources denied that ministers were about to pull the plug on the reforms, which they insisted were essential. But Labour MP John Grogan, a leading member of the leftwing Compass Group, said: “It would be a kamikaze move for Brown to reintroduce it to the Commons in June.”
Would you belive some one did this to save a trip to the tip,
Salford Councillor’s allowances – 2007/2008 Have a look how many get special allowances then ask yourself how many are labour members.
The allowances underlined are all labour, funny part is they are quick to have a go if you can’t attend a meeting.May be if we all had special allowances like Labour we would not have to work. I for one feel these allowances should be abolished, i sometimes think people forget why we got in to Local Politics in the first place.
| Last name | First name | Basic allowance | Special | Co-optee allowance | Travel and subsistence | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ainsworth | Geoff | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Antrobus | Derek | £9,810 | £12,660 | 0 | £27 | £22,497 |
| Boshell | Paula | £8,834 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £8,834 |
| Broughton | Alan | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Burgoyne | Eric | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Burgoyne | Valerie | £9,810 | £16,645 | 0 | £50 | £26,505 |
| Clague | Alan | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | 0 | £17,724 |
| Coen | Stephen | £9,810 | £5,263 | 0 | 0 | £15,073 |
| Compton | Graham | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Connor | Peter | £9,810 | £12,660 | 0 | £21 | £22,491 |
| Cooke | Stephen | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Cullen | John | £1,004 | £615 | 0 | 0 | £1,618 |
| Davies | Anne | £8,834 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £8,834 |
| Dawson | James | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | 0 | £17,724 |
| Deas | John | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Devine | Vincent | £9,810 | £6,006 | 0 | 15 | £15,831 |
| Dobbs | Peter | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Ferrer | Margaret | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Garrido | Karen | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | 0 | £17,724 |
| Garrido | Robin | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Gray | Christine | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Harold | Tony | £9,810 | £6,006 | 0 | 0 | £15,816 |
| Heywood | Janice | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Hill | Liz | £8,834 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £8,834 |
| Hinds | Bill | £9,810 | £12,660 | 0 | 0 | £22,470 |
| Howard | Beryl | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | £380 | £10,190 |
| Hudson | Christine | £1,004 | £615 | 0 | £289 | £1,907 |
| Hulmes | James | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Humphreys | Ann-Marie | £9,810 | £6,447 | 0 | £67 | £16,324 |
| Hunt | James | £9,810 | £7,329 | 0 | £1,171 | £18,310 |
| Jolley | David | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | 0 | £17,724 |
| Jones | Roger | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Kean | Joseph | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | £481 | £18,205 |
| King | James | £9,810 | £5263 | 0 | £303 | £15,376 |
| Lancaster | David | £9,810 | £14,244 | 0 | £1,050 | £25,104 |
| Lea | Bernard | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | £78 | £9,888 |
| Lea | Maureen | £9,810 | £12,878 | 0 | £200 | £22,888 |
| Lightup | Roger | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | £610 | £18,334 |
| Lindley | Iain | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Loveday | Gina | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| MacDonald | Ian | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Mann | Keith | £9,810 | £14,206 | 0 | £743 | £24,759 |
| McIntyre | Charlie | £8,834 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £8,834 |
| Merry | John | £9,810 | £27,429 | 0 | £360 | £37,599 |
| Miller | Barbara | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | £37 | £9,847 |
| Morris | Margaret | £9,810 | £3,878 | 0 | 0 | £13,688 |
| Mullen | John | £9,810 | £5,263 | 0 | £27 | £15,100 |
| Murphy | Jane | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | £63 | £9,873 |
| Murphy | Joseph | £9,810 | £11,837 | 0 | 0 | £21,647 |
| O’Neill | Joseph | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Owen | Norman | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | 0 | £17,724 |
| Pennington | Bernard | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | £697 | £18,421 |
| Pooley | John | £1,004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £1,004 |
| Potter | Norbert | £9,810 | £6,006 | 0 | £6 | £15,822 |
| Ryan | Patricia | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | £54 | £9,864 |
| Salmon | Andrew | £9,810 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £9,810 |
| Sheehy | Edmund | £1,004 | £1,295 | 0 | £204 | £2,503 |
| Smyth | Alice | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | 0 | £17,724 |
| Taylor | Janice | £8,834 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £8,834 |
| Turner | Leslie | £9.810 | 0 | 0 | £224 | £10,034 |
| Warmisham | John | £9,810 | £12,660 | 0 | £841 | £23,311 |
| Warner | Barry | £9,810 | £12,660 | 0 | 0 | £22,470 |
| Wilson | George | £9,810 | £7,914 | 0 | £342 | £18,066 |
| Witkowski | Stanley | £6,159 | 0 | 0 | 0 | £6,159 |
Salford City Council’s seven pledges have the Labour run council come good?
All of the council’s services and activities, from refuse collection to social services, aim to meet one or more of the pledges outlined below.
They serve as a long-term framework, shaping the way we work and guiding us towards achieving our mission statement:
“To create the best possible quality of life for the people of Salford.”
Click on the description of each for further details, including our headline targets for the current year.
- Pledge 1: Improving health in Salford
- Pledge 2: Reducing crime in Salford
- Pledge 3: Encouraging learning, leisure and creativity in Salford
- Pledge 4: Investing in young people in Salford
- Pledge 5: Promoting inclusion in Salford
- Pledge 6: Creating prosperity in Salford
- Pledge 7: Enhancing life in Salford
All of the council’s services and activities, from refuse collection to social services, aim to meet one or more of the pledges outlined below.
A message to the residents of this city, It’s like something set in stone pledges made by this Labour run council to you. Seven pledges ,sit back sip at your brew and tell me if you feel these pledges have been achieved. Look closely at each one and relate it to you personally and tell me what you think.disappointed ?well most of the city are. But remember you have the power to make the change.A change for your future and your children’s don’t forget to use it when the time comes,
Blears backs people’s revolution to recycle buildings? i would like to ask if it will be as succesfull as the house repo scheme?
Communities Secretary Hazel Blears has today unveiled a series of measures to back a people’s revolution to recycle buildings by putting real power in the hands of locals to support communities during the downturn and beyond.
The tougher economic climate has led to renewed interest in communities maintaining local assets, from post offices to pubs.
As part of the Government’s empowerment agenda, Ms Blears has announced a new single advice line – 0845 345 4564 – and other Government support to make it easier for people to take control of community assets, from community centres to theatres.
Driving this revolution in the public sector, there are a range of options for local councils to give people real power including handing over buildings as a gift to a community group, selling at below market price, or keeping the building off the market while a local project develops their plans and secures the funding. Already, there are estimated to be over £1billion worth of buildings under community control – with some agreements dating back to the 1970s.
But from today, taking on a local building will become easier. As well as a new single national advice line for anyone wishing to find out how to do it, Ms Blears highlighted key projects that have set the standard – including Coin Street Community Builders in London and the Goodwin Development Trust in Hull – that anyone wishing to do it can learn from. A new Asset Transfer Unit will give local people the information they need to get through any planning, legal and financial barriers.
