No Murdo! Keep your nose out of English Business!

PRESS RELEASE

No Murdo!  Keep your nose out of English Business!

Murdo Fraser, the Conservatives' “Enterprise spokesman” in the Scottish Parliament told Glasgow University on Thursday that devolution to the UK nations must be balanced with greater powers to the English regions.

He claimed it would be "straightforward" to create a federal system for the nations by devolving tax-varying powers but full UK federalism would not work "on the basis of England as a single unit".

"It is quite possible to envisage a network of strong cities, or city regions, emerging to which powers could be devolved.”

"We can then add into the mix historic counties with a strong local identity, such as Yorkshire or Cornwall.”

"We do have areas such as the North-East or North-West, or East Midlands, which already have a coherent regional identity, and very quickly the map of England is filled up with a patchwork of local units, maybe not identical in geographic size, population or wealth, but all having an identifiable local focus."

Federalism would also resolve the "West Lothian Question" - the right of non-English MPs to vote on purely English matters - and reform of the Lords, Mr Fraser claims.

According to the Government’s own MacKay Commission Report there is much less support for breaking England up into such “Regions” than for outright English Independence from the UK. 

Perhaps Murdo Fraser MSP is promoting this new attempt to break up England for the same reason as the Liberal Democrats, “Charlie” Kennedy told Dunfermline Lib Dems in 1999 that he supported Regionalisation for England because it was “bringing into question the idea of England itself!”

Robin Tilbrook, the Chairman of the English Democrats said:-  “We don’t want Scottish politicians telling the English that England should be broken up. My message to any such Scottish politicians is keep your nose out of English business.”

Robin continued:- “The sooner the UK is dissolved the quicker the Nations of the former UK can live as friendly neighbours!”

Robin also said:-  “Dissolution of the UK is why the English Democrats are supporting a ‘YES’ vote for Scotland on the 18^th September.  Mr Murdo Fraser claims that “UK federalism would not work on the basis of England as a single unit”.  I say ‘so be it’!  Let’s dissolve a Union which  is in any case well past its sell by date!”

Robin Tilbrook

Chairman,

The English Democrats

The Scot’s poll can give hope to English patriots

The Scot’s poll can give hope to English patriots

I read with interest recently an article by Irvine Welsh, a Scottish author and socialist. The article published in the Evening Standard and was entitled “Scots poll can give hope to the Left across Britain. That issue is more than independence – this is about the journey of modernisation of these island’s political systems”

It seems to me that much of what Irvine Welsh says could be adapted for England, with a new title as above “The Scot’s poll can give hope to English patriots”. The article starts as follows:-

“Something strange and beautiful is happening in Scotland. The country is re-inventing itself from the inside out. People are talking about their futures as if they actually have them. It is that exhilarating, intoxicating, occasionally exasperating phenomena at work: welcome back participatory democracy. How these islands have missed you! To recap what’s happened in your absence: Everything has been set up in favour of a small, trans-national global elite. Most citizens are being or have already been reduced to the level of poorly paid, debt ridden servitude. Yes, many are still unemployed, but many more are underemployed, over-employed and set to work on barely liveable wages.

Within this context, looking at traditional indices of economic prosperity like unemployment rates, inflation, GNP is severely limited, as those don’t account for the reality of the past 35 years. The growing penury and financial instability suffered by everybody outside of society’s elites is the true political narrative of our times. It needs to be addressed locally and globally. This hasn’t happened in the UK. The main political parties remain complicit in the transfer of resources from our citizens to the super rich elite, under the advocacy of a private media, and through the constant lobbying of elected representatives. The “pragmatism” touted by politicians is one that solely addresses how to manage this movement of resources to the wealthy, to the constant reward of their corporate emissaries.

As a nation state the United Kingdom was an imperialist construct, and to this day it retains these undemocratic trappings: a hereditary principle, an un-elected second chamber, no written constitution and a ruling elite drawn from a narrow, privately educated strata of society …”

Irvine Welsh carries on in this way which many English nationalists would recognise as being equally true of England. Below is the whole article. I have inserted my comments in brackets.

Something strange and beautiful is happening in Scotland. The country is reinventing itself from the inside out. People are talking about their futures as if they actually have them. It’s that exhilarating, intoxicating and occasionally exasperating phenomenon at work: welcome back participatory democracy. How these islands have missed you.

To recap what’s happened in your absence: everything has been set up in favour of a small, transnational global elite. Most citizens are being or have already been reduced to the level of poorly paid, debt-ridden servitude. Yes, many are still unemployed, but many more are underemployed, overemployed and set to work on barely liveable wages.

Within this context, looking at traditional indices of economic prosperity like unemployment rates, inflation, GNP is severely limited, as those don’t account for the reality of the past 35 years. The growing penury and financial instability suffered by everyone outside of society’s elites is the true political narrative of our times. It needs to be addressed locally and globally.

This hasn’t happened in the UK. The main political parties remain complicit in the transfer of resources from our citizens to this super-rich elite, under the advocacy of a private media, and through the constant lobbying of elected representatives. The “pragmatism” touted by politicians is one that solely addresses how to manage this movement of resources to the wealthy, through the constant rewarding of their corporate emissaries.

As a nation state the United Kingdom was an imperialist construct, and to this day it retains these undemocratic trappings: a hereditary principle, an unelected second chamber, no written constitution and a ruling elite drawn from a narrow, privately educated strata of society.

In Scotland, voters have traditionally sent a block of Labour MPs to Westminster to represent them. Labour originated in Scotland as the party of Keir Hardie and had a strong home rule ethos. (Kier Hardie first made his name and came to prominence as a campaigner against mass immigration into his area of Scotland. In his day the mass immigration in question was of unskilled and semi-skilled Irish workers. He led a noisy campaign against importation of Irish workers which was reducing the wages paid to Scotland’s). 

 As it grew from a party of protest to one of power, Labour changed its view: the best way to govern was to send representatives down to London. Thus a career structure emerged, whereby “ambitious” politicians could move from local council to a safe Labour seat, then perhaps become a minister. When the party lurched to the Right in the Eighties, it was usurped on the “Left” by the SNP, a bourgeois nationalist party which had taken on social-democratic trappings.

Since then we’ve seen the rapid de-industrialisation of Britain, the sale of national assets, the dismantling of the welfare state, the squandering of oil revenues on dole payments and bread-and-circus foreign wars, and the steady erosion of the democratic, participatory spirit in politics.

Politicians changed. They were less likely to have trade union, industry or even professional backgrounds, more inclined to be career politicians, and people are now more alienated from them than ever. These changes took place under both Labour and Conservative governments.

Now Scotland, through the independence debate, is leading the way in the reassertion of the democratic ethos. The actual result of the referendum in September, while massively important, is less significant than the fact that this process has gained such traction.

Whether Scotland votes Yes or No, its people have got used to having a say in how their lives are run, outside of the self-interested and morally bankrupt party system. The drive for more of the same will continue. (The same could happen in England if we were successful in getting our independence referendum, or may be even if the Scots vote ‘YES’ and England is thereby reborn as an independent State following the dissolution of the UK.)

English protest politics have been of the Right in recent years: “Eurosceptic” Conservatives, Ukip, the BNP and EDL. But without the distraction of Scotland, England will have to look seriously at what it is and what it aspires to be. I would expect that narrative to change and the country to shake off its weary attachment to the cabal of centre-Right/Right-wing parties and their tired platitudes. Rather than enabling its political progression, Scotland holds England back by sending it more lobby-fodder careerists invested in zero substantive change. (England’s political traditions and culture are different from Scotland’s and I would think in any case the way which our politics will develop post-independence is likely to be very different to Scotland’s. I would not necessarily expect, as someone as steeped in the Scottish political culture as Mr Irvine is, to be fully aware of the difference or necessarily the different circumstances which brought it about.)

The Yes campaign’s biggest strengths are its vigorous grass-roots support, mainly from people who have felt disenfranchised by party politics. They are bolstered by the activities of the No campaign, with its unappetising coalition of the elite, the self-interested and the perennially servile, with the honourable but misguided exception of those who still believe, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, that the British state can deliver social progress and economic justice.

The No campaign’s main asset is people’s intrinsic fear of change. The anti-independence campaign is, in tone and substantive argument, the same as any other throughout history. It seeks to make administrative procedural arrangements of varying awkwardness into compelling reasons for maintaining the status quo. The same arguments, citing different processes, were used in America, Africa and Ireland (and practically every independent nation in the world) with the same dire consequences predicted if they were ignored. Of course they were, and yes, life went on much the same as ever.

It isn’t in the nature of any state to want to cede territory but it begs the broader question: why is the British Establishment so desperate to keep Scotland? Well, if there’s a Yes vote, north of the border instantly gets rid of the hereditary second chamber, the City of London and Britain’s public-school elites, all those forces superfluous to good government but expensively grandfathered into our current system. There will also be a proper constitution drawn up, conferring citizen rights and designating responsibilities. It’s inevitable that people in England will then look north and think: “I fancy a bit of that.”

So Scottish independence is about a lot more than self-determination for that country: it is about the genuine modernisation of these islands’ political systems, conducted through the restitution of participative democracy. I don’t know whether September will offer up a vote of hope or fear. But I am convinced that those who pushed themselves to the forefront of the debate on their futures are unlikely to cede that power back to the elites, as represented by the Camerons, Cleggs and Milibands of this world. And that might be contagious.

(Here is the link to the original>>> http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/irvine-welsh-the-scots-poll-can-give-hope-to-the-left-across-britain-9559111.html

Shhh! Lib Dems are about!

There seems to be something about Liberal Democrats that makes them hate England. At the moment they are, I don’t think the word is too strong to use, conspiring to find another way of breaking England up into “Regions”.

Their behind the scenes activity in think-tanks and discussion groups is all about trying to find another way of energising the “Regionalisation” of England. Their talk is all about trying to confuse people between talking about counties and “Regions” in the same breath so that people do not look at the small print to see that in fact what is intended is nothing to do with counties but everything to do with “Regionalisation”. In their desperation they are even trying to say that the North-east referendum result was not a vote against “Regionalistion”!

Now we have two Liberal Democrat Lords, Lord Purvis of Tweed and Lord William Wallace of Saltaire who arranged a debate for Monday, 16th June in the House of Lords entitled “Plans for further de-centralisation of the UK in the event of a “No” vote in the Scottish Independence Referendum”. Observers of the oily disingenuousness of our LibDem political masters will find no surprise that the key element of the discussion was about how to break up England.

The names that they have chosen to give their titles suggest that these two noble Lords loyalties might lie North of the Border, but Lord William Wallace of Saltaire is in fact an academic who has spent most of his life in England, but has distinguished himself politically by his desire to advance the cause of European integration for which reason he has been awarded the Légion d'Honneur.

So far as Lord Purvis of Tweed is concerned, the Scottish newspaper, the Sunday Post, reported on the 20th October 2013 that “Purvis returns as Lord Jazzer despite ballot box defeat” who reported that “Purvis, a MSP until the SNP landslide in 2011 is a man steeped in constitutional concerns. Nick Clegg has made him Lord Purvis of Tweed to act as a bridge-man between the Westminster and Holyrood parties. Even his title straddles the border. Said Purvis:- “I’ll bring the respect of someone who has been a Member of the Scottish Parliament as a fan of the procedures in Holyrood. It will provide a platform to work on the growing middle ground as an alternative to independence.”” The paper rightly continues “The problem for Purvis, with his talk of accountability, democracy and constitution, is that on Tuesday he will don an outrageous ermine cloak and take his place in the least accountable or democratic place in British politics. This is, after all, a man rejected by the voters returning to front line politics without the need for an election.”

So there we have it, the classic Westminster farce in which people talk about democracy, accountability, citizenship and community, whilst trying to work to deny the English their sense of a national community.

Never forget that a former LibDem leader, Charlie Kennedy told an enthusiastic meeting of Liberal Democrats in Dunfermline in 1999 that he supported the break-up of England into Regions because he said “In England Regionalisation is calling into question the idea of England itself”!

So what should an Englishman do when the LibDems are about? Perhaps we could use US President Teddy Roosevelt’s famous saying: “speak softly and carry a big stick”? 

What do you think?


 

Karl Marx’s views of England and the English

Karl Marx’s views of England and the English

I have recently been reading a book about Karl Marx. Although I have read some of his works before I have never read a full biography of him. I could heartily recommend, as an interesting and informative read:- KARL MARX by Francis Wheen.

For those interested in Karl Marx’s views of England and the English, he was, of course, one of those refugees, a bit like, Abu Hamza, who lived here for many years but yet never integrated, nor had any great love for us. Just consider the following comments on page 142:-

“After brooding on the lessons of the previous year, (Marx) published a revised revolutionary menu on 1 January 1849:

The overthrow of the bourgeoisie in France, the triumph of the French working class, the emancipation of the working class in general, is therefore the rallying cry of European liberation.

But England, the country that turns whole nations into its proletarians, that takes the whole world within its immense embrace …England seems to be the rock against which the revolutionary waves break, the country where the new society is stifled in the womb.

Every social upheaval in France was bound to be thwarted by the industrial and commercial power of the English middle class, ‘and only a world war can overthrow the Old England, as only this can provide the Chartists, the party of the organised English workers, with the conditions for a successful rising against their gigantic oppressors!. This seasonal game of consequences – which, more than a century later, would come to be known as the domino theory – led to an inescapable and apocalyptic conclusion. ‘The table of contents for 1849 reads: Revolutionary uprising of the French working class, world war.”

SUPPORT THE SCOTTISH “YES” VOTE - FOR ENGLAND'S SAKE!

HERE'S OUR PRESS RELEASE:-

THE ENGLISH DEMOCRATS REGISTER TO SUPPORT SCOTTISH “YES” VOTE

With there now being less than 100 days to go to the Scottish Referendum on the dissolution of the United Kingdom, the English Democrats have registered with the Electoral Commission to participate in the Scottish Referendum campaign to campaign for a “YES” vote.

A “YES” vote on the 18th September is the easiest way for Nationalists to achieve a dissolution of the United Kingdom, which since the end of the era great power politics, has been a persistent drag on the English Nation. The United Kingdom State is expensive, incompetently authoritarian and vain-gloriously addicted to its great power status whilst draining the wealth of England with its vanity projects, its international interventionalism and its failure to focus on the best interests of the English Nation.

Robin Tilbrook, Chairman of the English Democrats said:- “I am delighted that the English Democrats have registered to help the “YES” campaign succeed in the coming referendum in Scotland. It is well worth us getting involved in supporting such an opportunity for the re-emergence of an independent Kingdom of England following the repeal of the Act of Union 1707.”

Robin added:- “For the mathematically minded I would put the UK’s dissolution as a formula:- E + S = GB ergo GB – S = E.”

Robin Tilbrook
Chairman,
The English Democrats
Blog: http://robintilbrook.blogspot.co.uk/
FaceBook Profile: http://www.facebook.com/robin.tilbrook
Party Tel: 0207 242 1066
Twitter: @RobinTilbrook
Party Website: www.englishdemocrats.org
English Democrats' FB Page: http://www.facebook.com/robin.tilbrook#!/www.EngDem.org
Chairman's FB
Page: http://www.facebook.com/robin.tilbrook#!/Robin.Tilbrook.English.Democrats

Key facts about the English Democrats

The English Democrats launched in 2002.
The English Democrats are the English nationalist Party. We campaign for a referendum for Independence for England; for St George’s Day to be England’s National holiday; for Jerusalem to be England’s National Anthem; 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; and we support a YES vote for Scottish Independence.

The English Democrats are England’s answer to the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru. The English Democrats’ greatest electoral successes to date include:- in the 2004 EU election we had 130,056 votes; winning the Directly Elected Executive Mayoralty of Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council in 2009 and also the 2012 referendum; in the 2009 EU election we gained 279,801 votes after a total EU campaign spend of less than £25,000; we won the 2012 referendum which gave Salford City an Elected Mayor; in 2012 we also saved all our deposits in the Police Commissioner elections and came second in South Yorkshire; and in the 2014 EU election we had 126,024 votes for a total campaign spend of about £30,000 (giving the English Democrats by far the most cost efficient electoral result of any serious Party in the UK).

BritScot Twitters:- "Heard you on Essex Radio saying it is unfair Scots get free scripts whilst the English don’t. This is devolution."

I was interviewed on Radio Essex on the 30th May, the day of the launch of the Scottish Independence period.  A twitter conversation came out of that which I think is of some interest with a BritScot, named Scott (sic!) Wardrope.  

The conversation went as follows:-
 
Scott:- "Heard you on Essex Radio saying it is unfair Scots get free scripts whilst the English don’t.  This is devolution."

Scott:- "The English could have free scripts/university, but choose not to, whilst the Scots do.  What is unfair about that?"

Me:-  "Both paid for by English taxpayers and not offered to us by our British masters."

Scott:-  "I think Scottish taxpayers also make a contribution.  In fairness the Scots also have to pay for Trident and illegal wars."

Me:-  "House of Lords report says England subsidises Scotland to the tune of £32 billion per year."

Scott:-  "Politicians bend the facts to suit their views though.  We will only know for sure if we actually get our independence."

Me :- "Are you Scottish and a yes voter?"

Scott:-  "I am Scottish, but live in Essex, so I cannot vote on the indyref."

Me:-  "Well then you are just as disadvantaged as any Englishman by the current arrangements!"

Scott:- "Indeed!  I am reduced to lobbying friends and family from over the border."

Me:- "If they vote yes then you will have to choose whether you are Scottish or English.  Which would it be?"

Scott:-  "Scottish.  I suspect a few ex-pats Scots will be returning home after the yes votes.  Sadly it seems indy Scotland will join the EU."

Me:-  "Interesting!  Your, and their, ultimate loyalty to Scotland and not England is a further strong argument for English independence!"

Scott:-  "I suppose it is.  Scots have stronger nationalism than the English though.  Nationalism is a dirty word down south."
 
The twitter conversation was then joined by Scott Laing.

Laing said :- "That is a false choice – option is not “English” but “British”.  Cannot choose to be English surely?"

Me to both:- "You will not be able to be British if Scotland goes!  E + S = GB therefore GB – S + E".

Me:- "As historian AJP Taylor pointed out that is because Scots in England have been pushing Britishness for some 70 years now."

Laing:-  "And what about W and NI?  Even better together folk such as myself would choose S if between S and E."

Scott:-  "The Left have equated English nationalism with racism and other nasty isms."

Scott:-  "Britishness is a dying concept.  Unless WW3 breaks out, Britishness will bite the dust."

Scott:-  "England won’t be able to drop NI Prods there feel more British than most English."

Me to both:-  "Wales was incorporated into the KGD of England in 1536 the NI remnant of the 1801 Union lapses with the dissolution of GB."

Me to both:-  "Not a question of feelings but of constitutional law."

Scott:-  "A YES vote will create much uncertainty in NI then. There is a lot of union flags there that need tweaking."


 

ENGLAND says YES to Scottish Independence!

ENGLAND says YES to Scottish Independence!

Here is the text of our press release:-

The 30th May saw the start of the Scottish Referendum in earnest.

The English Democrats, England’s only nationalist Party, supports the YES campaign for Scotland to vote for Independence.

Constitutionally – A YES vote will lead to the dissolution of the United Kingdom of Great Britain this will therefore lead to Independence for England - Good news for English Nationalists!

EU – Both Scotland and England will be New or “Successor” states in International Law and so, as Senor Barroso recently confirmed, they will both be automatically outside the EU – Good news for Eurosceptics!

Barnett Formula – The House of Lords reported in 2009 that the subsidy from English Taxpayers to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland was £49 billion per year. This will cease with the Dissolution of the UK - Good news for English Taxpayers!

UK Debt - The British Government is one of the most profligate and spendthrift institutions on earth and has run up debts of well over £1 trillion and is still increasing even that stupendous figure by over £100 billion a year in “deficit”. This £1 billion per week (52 billion a year) is now bleeding England white. Dissolution of the UK means that financially our New Nation States will not be required to take on the British Government’s debts - Good news for our grandchildren!

UN Security Council – The Dissolution of the UK will mean that our New Nation States will not automatically have the British position on the UN Security Council and so our politicians won’t be so easily diverted from doing their duty to look after the interests of our Nation and People by the glittering prospects of strutting about “punching above our weight on the world stage” – which has cost us over £29 billion in our strategic failures in Iran and Afghanistan. Good news for all who long for us to mind our own business and to look after England’s interests! (the real "Little Englanders"?)

Robin Tilbrook, the Chairman of the English Democrats said:- “Scottish Independence offers a terrific opportunity not only for Scotland but also for England to Reboot or Restore good sense and good order for our Nation and to wipe away the terrible effects of years of British Government incompetence, irresponsibility and profligacy!”

Robin Tilbrook
Chairman,
The English Democrats