Total Visits

Sunday, 23 September 2012

My Speech to our St Albans' Conference

Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen and fellow English Democrats.  Welcome to our AGM and Conference and welcome to St Albans. 

I usually like to start my speeches with a joke.  So as it is a political speech let’s start with the shortest joke in politics today – Nick Clegg!

Ladies and gentlemen just listen to this from one of his speeches in 2002:- 

"The euro has done more to enforce budgetary discipline in the rest of Europe than any number of exhortations from the IMF or the OECD. If we remain outside the euro, we will simply continue to subside into a position of relative poverty and inefficiency compared to our more prosperous European neighbours."

Ladies and gentlemen In August 2002 about 30 English Nationalists met at Imperial College to formally launch the English Democrats.  Now here we are, the product of that meeting, gathered together in 2012.  Now, even on paper, we are almost the only English nationalist party, but in reality we are by far and away the most substantial one.  Now we have over 3,000 members.  Now we have increasing activism across England.  Now we are standing regularly in elections and we are doing increasingly well with several successful elections under our belt, not only for district or borough councillors, but also for our most high profile election success to date, our Mayor of Doncaster, Peter Davies!  Peter couldn’t be here with us today but he has invited us to go to Doncaster for our Spring Conference. 

Ladies and gentlemen in Doncaster this year we thrashed the local Labour Party in a Mayoral referendum which they had forced upon the people of Doncaster out of petty spite against Peter.  This is because Peter has made a great success of being Mayor of Doncaster and he will be standing again for us, next May, for re-election.  We will be holding a pre-election rally on the 27th October for South Yorkshire and will be focussing on gearing up, in particular, for Peter’s Doncaster Mayoral election.

Ladies and gentlemen, as I say, as we gather here today, we are not only the leading English nationalist party, but we either are already or shortly will be the leading nationalist party in England, as we are poised to overtake the British National Party as well as all other English nationalist parties.  The other British Nationalist parties are tiny - with even the largest one having only a few hundred members.

In terms of the challenges before us in the coming year, we have the Police Commissioner elections in November and a parliamentary by-election in Corby.  We will be holding a day of action and rally in Corby on the 13th October and a rally in Kent on the 10th November just before the Police Commissioner elections.  We will also be holding our National Christmas dinner in the Army and Navy Club, Pall Mall on the 8th December.  Please put these dates in your diary. 

So ladies and gentlemen we are a Party that is going places and getting active, getting organised, making progress and building up.  Did you like the ‘England Awake!’ Magazine?

Ladies and gentlemen what are we building up to?  Well the answer to that ladies and gentlemen is that we are building up, not only to the County Council elections next year, but the EU elections which are in 2014 and which will take place in the run up to the Scottish Independence referendum.  There could be no better timing for us.  That will be the very time when the English people will most want a political voice for our nation – and we are that voice!

Ladies and gentlemen our aim is to be the voice of all reasonable, moderate, sensible patriots in England; of all those that care for England; of all those that want common-sense policies in England; of all those that want politicians elected who care for the whole of their communities and who will not allow political correctness to cloud their judgment as to what is best for all the people of our great country. 

Never forget that our country, England,  is not only arguably the oldest nation state on earth, united as we were in 927 AD, but our country is also the originator of so much that makes up the modern world, from the Industrial Revolution to cricket, from the Rule of Law and Common Law to Parliamentary democracy, from constitutional monarchy to the rules of tennis, from banking to the greatest world empire, from the idea of pure bred domesticated animals to the English language that English is a language with over one million words and growing!  Far more words than any other language ever.  It is the only language in which you could say: “A man fell into an upholstery machine but now he is fully recovered” and laugh.

I could go on for a long time about the achievements of our nation, our English nation, but I am sure you wouldn’t thank me if I did so.  Suffice to say that I am told that there really is a single College at Cambridge University whose Professors and Fellows have won more Nobel prizes than France! 

But ladies and gentlemen this is no time to be complacent or self-congratulatory about all this, England is in danger and when I say England I mean “the very idea of England itself”, as Charles Kennedy enthused in 1999 before a group of Liberal Democrats in Dunfermline, when he thought regionalisation was calling into question the idea of England itself and would be the means to break us up forever!  Ladies and gentlemen what do we say to that Liberal Democrat aim?
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, England itself is in danger.  The very idea of England itself is in danger from Westminster and EU politicians determined to split us up into Regions. 

The very idea of England itself is in danger from an EU determined to take as much money out of England as possible to distribute to other parts of the EU, like Greece and Italy.  That figure is currently £19.2 billion per year and set to rise.  Yes, the very idea of England itself is in danger from people like David Cameron who says that because “I am a Cameron and there is quite a lot of Scottish blood flowing in these veins”, that it is okay to use £32 billion per year of English taxpayers’ money to subsidise Scotland!

Yes the very idea of England itself is in danger because of the careerist multi-culturalists who want to break up and partition the various communities of our nation into politically manipulable communities that will enable these people to advance their careers upon the backs of those communities. 

Yes, the very idea of England itself is in danger from an Establishment which literally wishes to swamp our culture with unrestricted immigration so that England can never again be the rock which Karl Marx complained wrecked all the revolutions of Europe. 

Ladies and gentlemen make no bones about it, we have a real fight on our hands.  A fight against an Establishment for which the political battle is little more than a Punch and Judy show. Just think about a Punch and Judy show for a moment ladies and gentlemen.  If you have ever watched one you know that there is a seemingly vicious fight on the stage.  All the eyes and attention of the children and of the public are upon the stage.  But what is really there behind the stage?  Yes ladies and gentlemen, one person, one puppet master.  In the Punch and Judy show of British Politics, there is one Establishment, one British political and media Establishment. 

Why does this matter?  Well not only because our struggle is to get the sleeping giant of the English Nation to wake up and stop dreaming that the Punch and Judy show is real, that is finally to stop dreaming that British Establishment politicians really care anything for England.  Our Nation needs to be told that.  They don’t care anything for England!  Anything positive that is!  Just listen to a few expressions of how the British political Establishment think about England.  
Labour’s – Jack Straw
“The English are potentially very aggressive, very violent”

John Prescott – “There is no such nationality as English” 

Labour’s - Gordon Brown always talked about
“the Nations & Regions of Britain” [Note Scotland, Wales & N Irleand are Nations - England is only a collection of Regions !] 

Conservative & Unionist -  Dave Donald Cameron 
“I’ll take on the sour Little Englanders, I’ll fight them all the way”.

Conservative & Unionist William Hague
“English Nationalism is the most dangerous of all forms of nationalism”. 

After listening to that, you will know, as I do, that the British political Establishment’s only thoughts about England is that they despise her.  They despise her people for their gullibility just like any conman would, having found a gullible and rich person.  You don’t need me, ladies and gentlemen, to tell you what will be left for the gullible rich person when the conman leaves chuckling to himself!  Chuckling with contempt at the person he has just ruined!
Ladies and gentlemen, the mission of our Party and our Cause and the English Movement generally is to wake up the people of England before it is absolutely too late.  We, who are awake, know that it is already very nearly too late.  So our mission ladies and gentlemen is not only an important mission but it is an urgent mission and we as a Party need to conduct ourselves knowing the urgency of that mission, however befuddled and stupidly sleepy the People of England are that we are trying to save from the consequences of their own lethargy and folly. 

That ladies and gentlemen is why we are getting organised.  That ladies and gentlemen is why we stand in elections.  That ladies and gentlemen is our purpose and with your help and with the help of all our Party members, past, present and future, that ladies and gentlemen has been and will be our mission - until we achieve our aim. 

Our aim, in Churchill’s words is: “Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.”   Churchill also gives us a guide to the means to achieve victory:  “Blood, toil, tears and sweat”! 

But, ladies and gentlemen, it will all be worth it - Shakespeare says it for all English Nationalists:-  “Come the three corners of the world in arms.  And we shall shock them.  Nought shall make us rue.  If England to itself do rest but true”.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen.

Tuesday, 18 September 2012

Scottish independence = the end of the UK = out of the EU!

Although this article , in the Scotsman Newspaper, is captioned in a peculiar way, suggesting that Scotland might remain within the EU, in fact the reported comments of the European Commission make it crystal clear that the opposite is the case. 
This can be seen more clearly in this item from the BBC 
So now it is clear beyond reasonable doubt that, if Scotland does become independent, then Scotland will be out of the EU and that Scotland would have to reapply (if it wanted to). 
Such an outcome would be very good for any English Eurosceptic voters (who are not fanatical Unionists!) because the end of the United Kingdom would automatically result in the other "Successor States", like the newly independent England, also being out of the EU! 
So in one swoop England would be free of the EU and free of paying our EU membership subs, currently £19.2 billion per year, and also free of paying Barnett Formula etc subsidies to Scotland of £32 billion per year (as calculated by the House of Lords)!
There is one curious wrinkle in the consequences of Scottish independence, which is that the Kingdom of England that would be left independent and as a "Successor State" incorporates Wales this is because the 1536 Act of Union between England and Wales predates the 1707 Union with Scotland!

Thursday, 13 September 2012


On the 19th May the English Democrats’ recent Liverpool Mayoral candidate, Paul Rimmer, went into his local police station at Toxteth in Liverpool, to ask them what the stripey flag that they were flying was about. He was told that it was “the gay flag”. After asking why Merseyside Police would fly the gay flag rather than either the Union Jack or the Cross of St George and quoting from the Old Testament, he left the station.

Almost immediately he was rather roughly grabbed by two burly policemen and told that he was being arrested for a “hate crime”, contrary to the Public Order Act. Paul pointed out that he had only quoted from the Bible and the Bible is in every court room in England, to which the PC responded that they were only obeying orders. Paul then reminded them that that is what the Gestapo had said! He was then dragged off in handcuffs to another police station to be photographed, finger printed and his DNA taken before having a police interview and held for six hours.

On the 19th July the Merseyside Police formally dropped any charges. Now it is our turn to counterattack!

Whilst waiting to hear whether any charges would be pressed, on my advice, Paul enquired from Liverpool City Council whether Merseyside Police had obtained permission under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement)(England) Regulations 2007. Very reluctantly, Liverpool City Council confirmed in writing that no such permission was obtained or even applied for. This means that it was Merseyside Police which had actually committed the criminal offence – not Paul.

In fact they have committed not one criminal offence, but the criminal offences of flying a non-permitted flag at 42 police stations across Merseyside.

Merseyside Police cannot even claim that they didn’t know about this law, as Freedom of Information Act requests have been made on several occasions previously about whether they had obtained permission in earlier years when they also flew this flag.

I am in correspondence with Merseyside Police’s solicitors and haven’t yet had the (probably apocryphal) response which allegedly police officers used to tell courts that the accused had confessed that “it was a fair cop gov, I am banged to rights!” – but I live in hope!

In addition to bringing a private prosecution against Merseyside Police, Paul also has civil claims, not only for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment, but also for breach of his human rights in being arrested contrary to his right to free speech. He also has discrimination claims, not only on the grounds of religion, but also on the grounds of sexuality in preferring one sexuality over another contrary to the Equalities Act.

Merseyside Police have demonstrated an official bias towards support of a partisan position, rather than what an English police force should demonstrate - a determination to enforce the laws of England impartially!

The Chief Constable and Senior Officers of Merseyside Police have shown themselves to be not only slap dash in their compliance with the rules, but also politically correct hypocrites, willing to adopt a heavy handed approach to anyone who dares to exercise an Englishman’s traditional rights of free speech to criticise their politically partisan stance.

Pauls is delighted at the support that he has received from almost everybody that he has met in Liverpool since it became known that he and the English Democrats were leading the fight back against this particular manifestation of political correctness.

Last, but not least, we are now seeking funding to help Paul stand as the English Democrats’ Police Commissioner candidate for Merseyside with a mandate of Zero Tolerance for Politically Correct policing! Below are some extracts from our manifesto setting out the English Democrats’ policies on policing.

If elected he will root out the political correctness of Merseyside’s senior police officers. Focus the Force on traditional common-sense policing and maintaining law and order and catching real criminals! May be his slogan will be “Zero tolerance for political correctness in Merseyside policing!”. Paul does urgently need help with funding his campaign and with the financing of this case. If you would be willing to help with a donation whatever size, please click here>>>

If Paul can raise the £5,000 to pay the deposit he will be in the running to set the priorities of Merseyside Police, decide their budget and he will have the right to hire and fire their Chief Constable. If you would like to help donate to the campaign to bring Merseyside’s PC police to book, please click here>>

This is not about homophobia but it is about making sure that Merseyside Police obey the law and that they act in a way which maintains traditional English liberties with old fashioned firm but fair and impartial enforcement of Law and Order and that they do not act in a politically partisan way in support of multi-culturalist political correctness. Any support that you can give will be very gratefully received!

This case has now been formally commenced in the Liverpool Magistrates Court by “laying the information”. The text of the information is set out below.

Here is the text of Paul’s Information, starting the prosecution of the Chief Constable and the Superintendent in Charge of Toxteth Police Station and the Police Authority.

Section 1 Magistrates Courts Act 1980 - Part 7 Criminal Procedure Rules 2011


Prosecutor: Mr Paul Rimmer, Modred Street, Liverpool
Defendant: Mr Jon Murphy, Chief Constable of Merseyside,
Police Headquarters, PO Box 59, Canning Place, Liverpool, L69 1JD
Charge: On the 19th May 2012 being the owner or occupier of premises namely Admiral Street Police Station, Toxteth, Liverpool displayed an advertisement namely a Flag sometimes known as the "Gay Rights" or "Rainbow" Flag when no consent had been granted for such display
Contrary To Regulation 30 of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and Section 224 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Statement of Facts;

The Defendant being the Chief Constable of the County of Merseyside is the "owner or occupier" of the premises with authority to display, or not display, Flags at those premises. On the 19th May the Prosecutor observed that the Police Station in Admiral Street, Toxteth was flying a Flag of the type commonly referred to as the "Gay Rights" or "Rainbow" Flag. This Flag is not the National Flag of any country, nor is it the Flag of the Commonwealth, the European Union, the United Nations, any English County, or the Flag of any Saint. Under the Act and the Regulations made thereunder the owner or occupier of Premises requires consent from Liverpool City Council in order to display such a Flag. By a letter dated 12 June 2012 Liverpool City Council confirmed that no application under the Regulations had been made by or on behalf of the Defendant or any other person, for consent to display the Flag and therefore the display of the Flag was an offence under the Regulations"


Prosecutor: Mr Paul Rimmer, Modred Street, Liverpool
Defendant: Mr Gary Hilton,
Superintendent: Admiral Street Police Station, Toxteth, Liverpool L8 8JN
Charge: On the 19th May 2012 being the occupier of premises namely Admiral Street Police Station, Toxteth, Liverpool displayed an advertisement namely a Flag sometimes known as the "Gay Rights" or "Rainbow" Flag when no consent had been granted for such display
Contrary To Regulation 30 of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and Section 224 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Statement of Facts;

The Defendant being the Senior Officer in Charge of the above Police Station is the "occupier" of the premises with authority to display, or not display, Flags at those premises. On the 19th May the Prosecutor observed that the Police Station in Admiral Street, Toxteth was flying a Flag of the type commonly referred to as the "Gay Rights" or "Rainbow" Flag. This Flag is not the National Flag of any country, nor is it the Flag of the Commonwealth, the European Union, the United Nations, any English County, or the Flag of any Saint. Under the Act and the Regulations made thereunder the owner or occupier of Premises requires consent from Liverpool City Council in order to display such a Flag. By a letter dated 12 June 2012 Liverpool City Council confirmed that no application under the Regulations had been made by or on behalf of the Defendant or any other person, for consent to display the Flag and therefore the display of the Flag was an offence under the Regulations"


Prosecutor: Mr Paul Rimmer, Modred Street, Liverpool
Defendant: Merseyside Police Authority
PO Box 101a, West House, Mercury Court , Tithebarn Street, Liverpool L69 2NU Mr Gary
Charge: On the 19th May 2012 being the owner or occupier of premises namely Admiral Street Police Station, Toxteth, Liverpool displayed an advertisement namely a Flag sometimes known as the "Gay Rights" or "Rainbow" Flag when no consent had been granted for such display
Contrary To Regulation 30 of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and Section 224 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Statement of Facts;

The Defendant being the Police Authority for the County of Merseyside is the "owner of occupier" of the premises with authority to display, or not display, Flags at those premises. On the 19th May the Prosecutor observed that the Police Station in Admiral Street, Toxteth was flying a Flag of the type commonly referred to as the "Gay Rights" or "Rainbow" Flag. This Flag is not the National Flag of any country, nor is it the Flag of the Commonwealth, the European Union, the United Nations, any English County, or the Flag of any Saint. Under the Act and the Regulations made thereunder the owner or occupier of Premises requires consent from Liverpool City Council in order to display such a Flag. By a letter dated 12 June 2012 Liverpool City Council confirmed that no application under the Regulations had been made by or on behalf of the Defendant or any other person for consent to display the Flag and therefore the display of the Flag was an offence under the Regulations"

Relevant parts, about policing policy, of the English Democrats’ manifesto are below:

1.6 The English Flag

1.6.1 We call for the compulsory flying of the English flag, the cross of St George, on all state-maintained public buildings in England.

2.11 Policing

2.11.1 Policing is an increasingly difficult job due to changes in our society, which now lacks the social cohesion and shared values that once gave us a mostly peaceful and well-ordered way of life. Our cities have become places where it is impossible to perform traditional communal policing.

2.11.2 English Democrats seek a return to a system of policing which recognises the principle that all citizens are treated equally. In their efforts to prevent crime and catch criminals the police should not be hindered and demoralised by unreasonable ideological constraints.

2.11.3 We should not lose sight of the fact that the basis for the maintenance of law and order in England rests on a firm foundation of active participation by law-abiding citizens. A relationship of trust and co-operation between citizens and police is essential to effective policing and the prevention of crime. With that in mind, it is reasonable to expect that policing should not be oppressive. The aim is a peaceable society in which liberty and justice can flourish.

2.11.4 It is essential that the police force be adequately trained and resourced.

2.11.5 Police forces should be more democratically accountable than at present. This would require the election of Chief Constables or the Police Authorities which appoint them.

2.11.6 English Democrats call for the creation of a scheme enabling businesses to pay for their security staff to train and register as Special Constables, their powers of arrest applying to their place of work and its neighbouring streets. Such registered security staff would be subject to Police staff performance monitoring and discipline.

2.12 The Legal System

2.12.1 The primary role of a legal system is to provide the means for settling disputes. It should enable those who suffer loss, in the form personal injury, theft, or damage to property, to be properly compensated by the party at fault. Laws, and the penalties for breaking them, should comply with the principles of natural justice.

As societies have become more complex, so have their law codes. To a great extent, this is unavoidable.

2.12.2 However, states and their governing elites are extending the reach of law into areas that infringe upon individual liberties. The result is a body of law which is more restrictive and complex than it need be. Many of the customs and principles of English law are being undermined in the political quest for greater conformity with Continental ideas and practices. Law is being used as a tool for imposing dogma. One of the consequences of these changes is that the police are increasingly being made the enforcers of political doctrine and moving further away from their traditional role of upholding the delicate balance between Order and Liberty.

2.12.3 In order to obtain justice, citizens must feel able to consult and employ the services of the legal profession. Many people are deterred from this by the procedures and costs of the present legal system. Improvements have been made in recent years but more needs to be done to make the system user friendly and efficient.

2.13.4 The English Democrats favours less law and a simplification of law. There are far too many matters currently covered by the criminal law. There should be a drastic reduction and rationalisation of the number and extent of criminal offences.

2.13.5 We must reform the jury system but not abandon it because the jury provides a democratic check on the legal system. The law is not the property of lawyers; it belongs to the people and should serve their needs.

Our preference is for a return to comprehensible, just and effective law. Given its current chaotic state, the law should be codified.

2.13.6 Once the criminal law has been properly codified, the English Democrats would ensure that the criminal law is vigorously policed and enforced.

2.13.7 Except in an emergency there should be a single annual implementation date for new law. This will help rectify the current muddled situation where no one can be sure, without considerable effort or expense, whether a clause of a new Act has been brought into force or not. Also, some rules, for example the Civil Procedure Rules, are being rewritten so frequently that new editions are being published more than once a month! This leads, not surprisingly, to the shameful situation where no-one, not even the judiciary, can be sure of the current rule in force without first making unreasonable efforts to research the point.

2.13.8 In order to avoid such excessive complexity developing again, a monitoring system should be devised which ensures that new law is unambiguously comprehensible and properly and efficiently enforceable. This could be a function of a reformed Second Chamber.

2.13.9 The English Democrats respect the right of victims of crime to defend themselves and their property against criminals. The English Democrats would extend the right of self-help.

2.13.10 The English Democrats believe that every victim of a criminal offence should have the right to address the court on the question of sentence and for the court to be required to bear the victim’s views in mind when passing sentence.

2.13.11 It is not acceptable that 100,000 hardened criminals commit over half of all crime in the U.K. Once a criminal is identified as beyond effective rehabilitation he or she must be kept out of the community until no longer a risk.

2.13.12Prisons should be designed and equipped so that prisoners are not subject to degrading conditions

3.19 Political Correctness

3.19.1 The English Democrats share the public concerns as to the harm caused to our society by political correctness.

3.19.2 The English Democrats unreservedly condemn this intolerant creed. We reject the self-righteousness of political correctness and condemn the ideology as an evil. Political correctness is incompatible with a free and democratic society.

3.19.3 One key aspect of political correctness is that a person, an institution or a government is politically correct when they cease to represent the interests of the majority, and become focused on the deliberate subversion of English national culture and interests, the denigration of English history and of the English themselves, and the promotion of the objectives of minority pressure groups.

3.19.4 Political correctness is grounded in the capture of state institutions, with official spokespeople, legislative powers and sanctions for breaches of political correctness. It is this capture of state institutions which makes political correctness so oppressive and dangerous. This must end.

3.19.5 The English Democrats will take whatsoever measures are necessary to remove political correctness from both national and local government, including the various quangos and other government bodies funded either directly or indirectly by the taxpayer. These measures will include the following three steps: Firstly, those educational establishments, legal establishments, quangos, departments or other government organisations that are promoting political correctness will be fundamentally reconstituted and/or have their funding withdrawn or, where appropriate and if possible, be closed down. In particular, the so-called Commission for Equality and Human Rights will be closed. Private organisations that promote political correctness will not be awarded government contracts. Secondly, the English Democrats recognise that those institutions that are run by state appointees are the most detached from public opinion and are more likely to become politically correct. The English Democrats will, where practical, ensure that senior public employees, such as police chief constables and senior judges, are democratically approved by the community they serve. This will be achieved either via direct elections or via approval by democratically elected representatives. Many senior public posts will be subject to a maximum occupancy period, for such senior public employees to be accountable to the public will form a part of a bulwark against political correctness. Thirdly, the English Democrats will carry out a review of all laws and regulations, and will amend or, where appropriate and if possible, completely repeal those laws and regulations that foster and promote political correctness.

3.20 St George’s Day

3.20.1 The people of England should be able to celebrate St George’s day as a National Holiday

Wednesday, 12 September 2012

Is Plaid Cymru's new leader an Anti-English bigot? Judge for yourself!

The Guardian's Andrew Sparrow has interviewed Leanne Wood.

Judge for yourself - Is she really just a plain old fashioned bigoted Anglophobe but does not have the guts to admit it?

And also is she even a nationalist at all? Look at her comments on national identity.

Also what kind of a welsh nationalist would want yet more handouts from the English?

Here is the key extract from the interview:-
"Q: Alex Salmond .. described himself as a "staunch anglophile". Are you an anglophile?
A: I would not say I'm not an anglophile, specifically. I'm a francophile, I like Spain, I like Scotland.
Q: But are you a francophile but not an anglophile?
A: I don't have to choose as far as I see it.
Q: No, but if you are happy to describe yourself as a francophile are you happy to describe yourself as an anglophile?
A: I would like to see myself as somebody who looks to nations all over the world. England would be one of those. But it would not be over and above any others particularly for me.
National identity
Q: Do you think it is sensible to talk about national identity? Is there such a thing as an English national identity and a Scottish national identity and a Welsh national identity?
A: I do think there is such a thing. My approach to politics is very much as a civil nationalist. So for me Wales is about who lives here now and what contribution they want to make to building up our communities and our civic body politics, if you like. In a world that is becoming more Coca-Cola or Pepsi or McDonald's or Big Mac, people are going to want to find ways that mark their identity out as a bit different, find aspects of culture that are unusual and quirky, because I think that everything being the same is a bit boring and bland."

Here is a link to the full interview >>>

No wonder Plaid Cymru's support is slipping and that the English Democrats won more than double Plaid Cymru's vote at the last EU election!

Please do write to Ms Wood, to politely but firmly protest! Here is her email address:-

And here is the email of the Guardian's Andrew Sparrow if you would like to make the point to him too:-

Sunday, 9 September 2012

The UK - what's in it for England? The Unionist World Turned Upside Down?

My attention was caught today by a comment from a Scottish Nationalist, on Eddie Bone's recent article in the Huffington Post, who queried whether Unionists would be able to make a convincing argument for Scots to join the Union. Here is the link to that:-
Taking this lead, let's look at the benefits of England's membership of the United Kingdom in another way.

Just suppose that, instead of a Referendum for Scotland to leave the Union, there was in fact going to be a referendum about whether England should JOIN the Union.

How would British Unionists sell it to us English?
Would they tell us:-

That there would be no English parliament and that the new British state would take over control and use of our London Parliament in Westminster?

That the English People would have no effective way to affect policy in the Union because our leading political parties would all be dominated by careerist politicians who hate and fear the very idea of England?

That all the taxes and receipts collected in England would be transferred to the British Government in London to use as it wishes anywhere in the world whilst totally ignoring English National Interests?

That many English natural resources etc. would be deemed the property of the British Government in London and that they might transfer them to the ownership of the EU without even asking us?

That England would retain it's legal structure just to the extent and just as long as it didn't clash with the plans of the British Government in Westminster/Whitehall? That all English taxes and receipts would be subsumed into the British Government's Exchequer in Whitehall and that a much smaller share would be spent per person in England than in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and come at a cost to us of £49 billion a year?

That the English People would have no effective say in the defence of England?

That the English People would have no effective say about immigration into England even though England is now the fifth most crowded nation on Earth? That the British Government and British Establishment political parties would pursue policies of both breaking up England into "Regions" and our communities into seperatist multiculturalist ghettos whilst neither seeking nor having any democratic mandate at all to do so?

That the English People would have no effective say in EU matters and that the British Government would give nearly £30 Billion a year of English taxpayers' money to the EU without even asking us?

Now of course the basis of this supposition really is ridiculous because such politicians would never tell us the truth would they? But just suppose and just consider for a moment - would we English actually vote to join such a Union? This is the situation, though, and is exactly what British Unionist parties try to bamboozle us is such a great deal for England! Now I wonder what that Scottish Nationalist would say about all that?

Tuesday, 4 September 2012



There is quite a long standing (partly EU motivated), plan in Westminster to break up England into “Regions”.

The plan began being implemented by John Major’s “Conservative” Government after the Maastricht Treaty was signed.

When Labour came to power in 1997 they enthusiastically adopted the proposal as an adjustment of their plans to devolve the Nations of Scotland and Wales.

The various proponents of Regionalisation and of European integration waxed lyrical about getting rid of these old bug bears of the Left, England and the English Nation, upon the rocks of which, according to Karl Marx “all the revolutions of Europe founder”.

In 1999 Charles Kennedy, then the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, excitedly told an audience of the Party faithful in Dunfermline that he supported Regionalisation because “it is calling into question the idea of England itself”. Labour’s then Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, was claiming that “there was no such nationality as English” and Jack Straw, Labour’s Home Secretary, was saying “ The English are potentially very aggressive, very violent” with full agreement from the Conservative’s then Leader, William Hague, who even went so far as to claim “that English nationalism is the most dangerous of all forms of nationalism”!

But, alas for all the Regionalisers hopes, that old rock of England ripped out the bottom of their vessel even as the gerrymandered faux “Region” of the “North East” (formed by splitting the “Northern Region”, which the Conservatives had created with a view to gerrymandering a Conservative majority into the two Labour dominated “Regions”, “North East” and “North West”). John Prescott’s referendum there in 2004 was overwhelmingly rejected by 79% of the People.

Since that time the Regionalists have patched up their badly damaged vessel and tried to float “City Regions”. The bottom of that initiative has just been ripped out again by the failure of the City Mayoral referenda earlier this year.

Back to the dockyards the Regionalists vessel has had to go but its re-launch has just been announced! The Labour Think Tank, The Hannah Mitchell Foundation, led by “Professor” Paul Salveson, has just proposed, splitting England into two halves and there being a “Northern Parliament”. Talk about desperate!

But then you can see from the article that their main objective is trying to avoid an English Parliament! The doom of these hopes has already been pronounced by one of their own Think Tanks, the IPPR, in January (click here for a copy of that report>>> ).

I would remind everyone of Mahatma Gandhi’s saying which gives a good idea of how far advanced our cause now is: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

Here is the article>>>

"Think-tank calls for North to have its own parliament

YORKSHIRE should take its lead from Germany, with a separate parliament for the North, if the region is to avoid being caught in an economic pincer movement between a booming London and a resurgent Scotland.

A political think-tank believes this approach would be preferable to the “city deals” that Ministers recently signed off for?Leeds and Sheffield.

It comes after the Hannah Mitchell Foundation, set up in memory of the one-time suffragette and Labour campaigner in the North, held a special conference to debate devolution policy.

“What emerged was a consensus that the North of England needs its own devolved government with powers comparable to those currently enjoyed by the people of London, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland,” said Foundation chairman Barry Winter.

“We only have to look at post-war West Germany to see how successful regional government has been in creating an economic and political super-power. As long as England remains so centralised and London-focused, the North’s economy will never reach its full potential. A parliament for the North must work in a way that is open, democratic and inclusive. It’s about building a new kind of politics.”

However Foundation members expressed strong opposition to calls for an English Parliament.
“An English Parliament would be a London Parliament,” said Professor Paul Salveson, the campaign group’s general secretary.

“It would marginalise the North even more and enshrine the economic and political power of the South East to the detriment of all other parts of England.”

Prof Salveson says the key is striking the balance between a smaller government in Westminster, an effective Parliament for the North and reinvigorated local authorities."

Here is this Labour Think Tank's press release >>>

This is what I wrote to bait the Yorkshire Post:-

Dear Sir

Re: Article “Think Tank calls for North to have its own Parliament”

I was amused by your article announcing the comments of yet another Labour Think Tank with a tiny unrepresentative membership of far left cranks who are calling for England to be split into two, without the slightest trace of any democratic mandate to do so.

Labour’s attempt to break up England was overwhelmingly rejected by the People in its gerrymandered faux “region” of the “North East” in 2004. Now even its own researchers in one of its other Think Tanks, the IPPR, has admitted that the demand is growing for a Parliament for England.

You would have thought that Labour might have learnt its lesson and at least pretend to care for England and the English Nation! Their failure to do so shows the urgent need for all those that love England to combine within the only effective English nationalist party – the English Democrats!

Yours faithfully

Robin Tilbrook,
The English Democrats

If you like it, please do forward this blog article on to all your friends and relatives and everyone you know who may care about England, as all those that do care about England really do need to unite to make a determined call for an English Parliament and thus a final shipwreck of all the Regionalisers’ dreams!

Monday, 3 September 2012

Corby & East Northamptonshire Parliamentary By-election

Northamptonshire English Democrats appoint their candidate for the Parliamentary By-election in Corby & East Northamptonshire

The English Democrats are pleased to announce that David Wickham is our candidate for the Corby and East Northamptonshire By-Election.

David is 43 years old, married and a father of four children. He has lived in Corby for many years, latterly in the Lodge Park area of town and prior to that in Beanfield. David works in Corby for a food manufacturer, and he has worked in that industry for the last two decades.

David is very aware of Corby’s proud manufacturing history and would like to help in reversing the decline. Regrettably most new jobs in Corby are in warehousing and transportation which tend to be low-skilled and do not offer long-term prospects for young people. David believes that Corby must use its traditions to turn itself into a centre of excellence for manufacturing. With such an approach the town and the surrounding area can use the enthusiasm and abilities of local young people to create worthwhile jobs for the future.

David believes strongly in the preserving the United Kingdom, but knows that this can only be done if everyone is treated fairly. It is not right that people in England have to pay University Tuition Fees but in Scotland these are paid by the government. It is not fair that people in England pay for their medical prescriptions but elsewhere in the UK these are free. The United Kingdom can only be preserved in the long term if each of the four countries has their own parliament and pays for their services with the taxes raised in their country. Taxpayers in England cannot go on subsiding services in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland which are not available to them. The only way to address this unfairness is for England to have its own parliament and government, the same as in Scotland. We believe in a new political arrangement for the UK, a federation of separately governed countries, or in the current parlance - ‘devo-max’ for all.

David would like to end mass immigration into Britain, which is creating enormous pressure on house building and reducing the chances of young people finding work. He believes that we should adopt an Australian-style ‘points system’ so that we know the people who settle in Britain will be valuable to the economy. David believes that all immigrants must be able to speak English. However the English Democrats know that we cannot control our borders if we remain in EU, so we are in favour of an immediate referendum on our membership of the EU.

David knows that it is the broken promises of politicians, which has lead many people to become disenchanted with politics. The actions of the current MP have merely reinforced this opinion of politicians, that they are merely in it for themselves and that the ethic of public service has been forgotten. The existing Conservative MP claims she cannot balance life as an MP and a mother, but yet she has spent large amounts of the last 2 years building her ‘image’ in the media. Perhaps if she had spent less time in front of the camera and more time with her family then such problems would not have occurred. The people of this constituency have been poorly represented by Louise Mensch, who only seemed interested in her own career. David is promising, if elected, to arrange regular meetings with the voters in the constituency so that he can explain what he is doing and deal with any challenges to his behaviour. David is a local man, who is committed to helping Corby and East Northamptonshire. The English Democrats hope that you will support our campaign to ‘clean-up’ politics and elect genuine people to Parliament, not celebrities or career-politicians.

Northants English Democrats contact details:

Derek Hilling
English Democrats – East Midlands Chairman


Key facts about the English Democrats

The English Democrats launched in 2002. The English Democrats are the English nationalist Party which campaigns for a Parliament for England, First Minister and Government, with at least the same powers as the Scottish ones within a Federal UK; for St George’s Day to be England’s National holiday; for Jerusalem to be England’s National Anthem; for a Referendum to leave the EU; for an end to mass immigration; for the Cross of St George to be flown on all public buildings in England.

The English Democrats are England’s answer to the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru.

The English Democrats’ greatest electoral successes to date include winning the Directly Elected Executive Mayoralty of Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council and this year’s referendum; in the 2009 EU election we gained 279,801 votes after a total EU campaign spend of less than £25,000 (giving the English Democrats by far the most cost efficient electoral result of any serious Party in the UK!)