Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Why are taxpayers paying for lobbyists to lobby the Government?

The following bodies received  funding from the Government or Local Authorities in 2012.   They also lobby the Government!

ActionAid                                                            £4,466,000
Action on Smoking and Health                                £150,000
Alcohol Concern                                                     £209,336
Catholic Agency for Overseas Development         £9,034,000
Christian Aid                                                      £12,240,000
Child Poverty Action Group                                      £90,000
Disability Rights UK                                                £517,965
Family Action                                                     £14,654,000
Fresh North East                                                     £713,000
National Children's Bureau                                   £1,572,118
Oxfam                                                               £23,700,000
Save the Children Fund                                     £54,255,000
Shelter                                                                £2,569,000
Stonewall                                                                 £79,000
War on Want                                                         £162,544

Some of these bodies campaign as political lobbyists.   All spend some of their monies on campaigns or lobbying.   Is this right?

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

COPOV Forum 6th September

Forum

11am - 2pm Saturday, 6th September 2014
(coffee served from 10.30am)

@ All Saints Church Hall, Oval Way, Gerrards Cross, Bucks. SL9 8PZ

AGENDA :

The Conservative Party
Party Organization – Constituency News – Reports.

“Education Policy” by Stephen Parker

Referendum on Scotland’s Independence

Voter Engagement and Turnout
An inquiry by the Political and Constitutional Committee of the House of Commons

Do we need a new “Magna Carta”?

Politics Today – What concerns you most?

The History of Democracy in the United Kingdom
       A short lecture on democracy – the Peterloo massacre.

Any Other Business
1pm Lunch
     
A ploughman’s lunch will be available free of charge but a donation towards      our costs of hall hire and lunch would be much appreciated.
Directions: Go north through Gerrards Cross on Packhorse Rd, passing Ethorpe Hotel.   Take 1st left into Orchehill Avenue, then 2nd right into Oval Way.   All Saints Church is on your left past Thorpe House School.
Date of next meeting: Saturday November 1st – Forum, Gerrards Cross
All are welcome and do bring a guest
  ……………………………......................................................................................
E-mail: johnstrafford@btinternet.com 

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

More reality on climate change

Climate Change

Watch on YouTube.   Click above.
The second part of Cllr Derek Tipp's lecture to the COPOV Forum of 19th July

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Climate Change - the reality

Watch an excerpt from Cllr Derek Tipp's presentation to the COPOV Forum on 19th July about Climate Change
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLR-JxbjifE

Monday, July 21, 2014

Proposals to Revive PARTY membership

The Bow Group, Conservative Voice & Conservative Grassroots: 11 Steps the Conservative Party can take to revive its membership.

Ben Harris-Quinney
Below is a list of 11 recommendations that the Bow Group, Conservative Voice and Conservative Grassroots have published in order to help the Conservative Party reconnect with its base...
1. More Dialogue between Members of Parliament and Senior Volunteers
There needs to be real and regular dialogue between senior volunteers and Conservative Members of Parliament. We passionately believe in the concept of ‘one party’ – volunteers and parliamentarians working together for electoral success. During his time as Chairman of the Conservative National Convention, Don Porter was delighted to pioneer the election of three additional MPs to the Party Board. This simple change, overwhelmingly endorsed by both senior volunteers and MPs, allowed those with different roles within the Party to work together more closely to deliver a single vision and such initiatives could be rolled out in other more localised structures.
2. Party Board Chairman – Let Volunteers Decide
The Chairman of the Party Board should not be appointed by the Party leader. The Conservative Party website states that the Chairman’s role is to “bring the Conservative family together” and to “connect” the Voluntary and Parliamentary branches of the Party. To achieve this, the Chairman of the Board should be elected by Party members.
3. Empower the National Convention
The National Convention is the Parliament of the Voluntary Party. It comprises all Association Chairmen and Regional Offcers, along with representatives from the Conservative Women’s Organisation and Conservative Future. This body, whose members bring with them so much campaigning, experience and understanding of the Conservative grassroots should be given real powers and authority.
For example, National Convention members should have a real say about how the money they raise for the Party is spent. Volunteers raise over £28 million annually – more than even the most generous individual or corporate donors. They keep the blue fag fying at the local level by campaigning in local elections, fundraising and producing literature. Locally, they decide how to spend the money they raise. It is only right that they should have a say in how the money they raise for the national Party is spent by CCHQ.
4. Hold a Conservative Annual General Meeting
There should be a Conservative Party AGM which is open to all members. In addition, biannual regional meetings of the Party, to which all members in the region are invited, should also be resurrected nationwide. All MPs and MEPs should play a role in these sessions.
5. Let Volunteers Choose Candidates
Every Party Board committee should be led by an elected and experienced volunteer. Similarly, there must be no dilution of the involvement of members in the selection of their local and national candidates. This is an essential component in the fabric of our party.
To that end, open primaries should be scrapped in favour of closed primaries. They de- motivate Conservative activists and members. Loyal activists should not be overlooked by people with no history of commitment to the Party in favour of candidates who may feel that they owe no loyalty to the Party. Closed primaries offer a better alternative, and CCHQ should have no involvement in pushing forward an ‘approved list’ that has been centrally picked. The role should be reduced to one of very basic background checks.
6. Build a Broader Base of Support
The days of vast membership politics may be over. Therefore, we need an enlightened approach which allows the Conservative Party to reach out to groups which share our values, and to mobilise their support for the Conservative cause. We need to learn lessons not just from the American political parties but also from major charities, and to become more professional in our retention of members and supporters.
Both the Republican and Democrat Parties seek support from other like-minded organisations, political or otherwise, as a core part of their engagement activities. They use these ‘affnity groups’ to build up the level of trust in their party; they fundraise or gain volunteers for specifc issues that voters relate to and then ‘grow’ them into regular activists over a period of time. In an age where voters are more likely to support a single issue campaign than to join a political party, it makes sense for the Conservative Party to seek support amongst members of other groups which share our values.
7. Let Volunteers Drive the Conference Agenda
Volunteers should be given more chances to choose motions for debate at the annual Party Conference. These debates should be held away from television cameras and the media. By allowing members to speak in the main hall once again and vote on party policy as well as election manifestos, the conference can be reformed into a democratic, open and less stage-managed occasion.
8. Recognise and Reward Volunteers
There should be a real emphasis on recognising and rewarding loyal volunteers across the Party. Volunteers do not give up their time because they expect fnancial reward. However, some form of recognition – even a simple letter showing that the Party is aware of and appreciates a volunteer’s efforts – would be hugely appreciated and could raise grassroots morale.
Trusting the electorate to make decisions about local issues must be matched by trusting our local activists and members to have a greater say in the organisation of our Party and in the development of policies based on our values and principles. The time is now ripe for a real engagement of volunteers and parliamentarians in the running of our Party.
9. Revolutionising Online Communications
Digital has opened a whole array of options to interact with a politically curious but disaffected population. This requires a less centrally managed approach based on the delivery of a static message, and greater interaction by being open to petitions and motions to be debated. This is done successfully by pressure groups such as Avaaz and 38 degrees but needs to be mimicked by political parties in order to remain relevant.
10. The break-up of the Coalition Government
The Coalition should dissolve in the lead up to the 2015 general election, followed by a commitment not to enter into coalitions with non-conservative parties going forward. With the Coalition’s reason for coming in to existence – namely, the stabilising of the economy – now achieved, there is little reason to justify its existence. The normal shelf life of a government is four years, and the most signifcant aspects of the legislative agenda have been delivered.
By seeing out the rest of this parliament as a minority, the Conservatives can put clear night and day between themselves and their opponents and showcase themselves as the only choice for right wing voters in 2015. With a recent ComRes poll suggesting support for right wing parties (UKIP & Conservatives) is at over 50%, the notion that chasing this vote is a road to nowhere is a fallacy.
11. Say No To State Funding
No public money should be given to political parties. This would further damage levels of engagement among activists and reduce the incentives for the leadership to engage with them and place the beat traditions of British democracy under threat.

Thursday, June 26, 2014

COPOV Forum 19th July

Come to the COPOV Forum on 19th July and discuss Climate Change.   See "events".

Sunday, June 8, 2014

Climate Change - a Conservative View

Climate Change - a Brief Overview

by Cllr. Derek Tipp

How much do we really know about the climate of the past ten thousand years, or the past thousand years, or even the recent past century? And how confident can we be of the predictions of the next decades?  What is the effect of atmospheric CO2 on our global temperature? Also on sea level and ocean pH?  These are some of the questions to be covered in our climate change discussion at our July meeting.
The whole basis of climate science (formerly known as global warming) is based on the premise that the world is warming at a sufficient rate to alter the climate in an adverse way, AND that it is caused by man-made emissions of CO2. Most climate scientists agree that man is emitting CO2 and that this will cause some warming (approx. 1 degree Celsius for a doubling of CO2) if nothing else changes.
After that there are many disagreements, most fundamentally about the effect of other natural changes that could occur. Those who predict catastrophe believe other changes will reinforce the warming. There are many others who believe changes will mitigate the warming, or almost cancel it out. The future is very uncertain.
What is absolutely clear to anyone who discusses this subject privately with politicians in our Party is that there is certainly no consensus on how to deal with it. While some still believe the IPCC represents the science, an increasing number are having private doubts and a few are prepared to air them in public. 
 The dilemma faced by Western political leaders is that they have invested huge political capital in elevating the "cause" of reducing CO2 emissions to a very high priority.  In fact the UK government has gone further than any other, by passing the Climate Change Act (CCA). This Act enshrines a road map to 80% decarbonisation by 2050. It is now virtually impossible for them to ditch these policies without a massive loss of face.  Not only that, but considerable numbers of the public still remain convinced that the CO2 climate hypothesis is correct, which is hardly surprising after a huge propaganda campaign by the government as well as numerous other bodies. 
So, even if the evidence is moving in the direction of climate change not being such a major problem, or even not a problem at all, political leaders will still be likely to stick to their current policies. It would almost need the onset of an ice age before they would be forced to change tack.  But there is another problem that is beginning to face our hapless political leaders, that is that the cost of decarbonising the economy is getting more and more expensive.  
The measures they have taken so far are the least expensive and even these are causing hardship to many individuals and businesses as the cost of energy is rising quite rapidly. The next tranche of measures will be even tougher and so more unpopular. The dilemma  they face is, which is worse, ditching the CCA or carrying on with a policy that leads to ever dearer electricity and the consequent job losses? Will they be brave enough to tackle the transport sector and start to phase out the petrol and diesel engine?  Just imagine the huge cost of doing so!
The question that anyone looking at the facts would ask is, why are governments in the developed world prepared to spend very large sums of money to reduce CO2 emissions based on such uncertain evidence? The answer, I believe, is that this hypothesis has attracted a great deal of support from a number of different political causes. 
It suits the agenda of the UN itself which wants to have a bigger role in world governance. It suits the agenda of the Environmental movement, which includes those former communists who have infiltrated and made common cause with them. Curiously it appears to suit the democratic leaders of many Western nations, perhaps because it has the support of many high profile celebrities and "green" organisations and charities as well as a vocal minority of voters. Finally and very obviously, it suits the developing nations, who stand to gain very large sums of money. 
I do not believe there is a giant conspiracy going on. It is simply that the science of global warming due to increased atmospheric CO2, provides the imperative for action to reduce emissions and all the wealth transfer and increased taxation that flows from it.  Of course it is obvious to anyone that world emissions will not be reduced unless all industrialised nations are signed up to the same level of cuts.  
However the UN has come up with a system whereby the developed nations have to make significant cuts and the developing world have been exempt. As part of the package the policy has resulted in developed nations transferring significant sums of money to the developing nations either directly or through their industry purchasing  "carbon credits". 
Extraordinarily, the West has gone along with this and accepted the argument that they must accept responsibility for their "historic emissions" of CO2.  Up to the present this policy has, as expected, not halted the increase in world emissions of CO2, largely because the rise of Chinese and other developing nations' industry using fossil fuels, has meant that their increase in emissions is greater than cuts made by the developed nations. It is now clear that any future agreement must include these nations. Developing nations can no longer be allowed to benefit from this, yet this is the main reason why the whole thing is being supported by them. 
The next major conference on climate change is to take place in Paris in December 2015. The ambition of the UN is to get a world-wide binding commitment from all nations to make cuts in emissions of CO2, but the problem is that it is highly unlikely that all nations will agree, as the cuts will impact much more severely on some than on others. 
President Obama would like to sign up, but he may have a tough time getting a deal through the Senate. The Australian, Canadian and Japanese governments have already indicated they are not happy to sign a deal that would affect them negatively.  The Germans too seem to be off-message, despite a strong Green contingent in their government, as they increase coal usage while phasing out their nuclear power.
It looks as though the UK will be ready to sign up to any new treaty, whether it's David Cameron or Ed Miliband as our PM. It will be interesting to see if there is any more resistance from our MPs who were almost unanimous in passing the CCA. The political future, like the climate is very uncertain.



Monday, May 26, 2014

Question to George Osborne







View below to see full question:

http://news.sky.com/story/1268485/blofelds-poll-sends-shivers-through-tories

And these were some of the responses:

Sunday Mirror:

The blunt warning came as activists met to discuss how the party might cling to power.
MP Adam Afriyie – once tipped as a leadership challenger to Mr Cameron – said: “Many of our core supporters feel alienated and disillusioned.”
In a swipe at the PM’s time in public relations, he added: “Politicians need to come down from their ivory towers and talk to real people – I mean really talk to them, and really listen to them – not engage in some form of artificial listening PR stunt.”
Fellow Tory MP Robert Halfon urged the PM to hold public meetings to find out why voters were unhappy. He said the Tories, unlike Labour, did not have a “moral mission”.
He said: “When they (Labour) knock on a door everyone knows what they’re about. They know instinctively you’re there to help people who are less well off. What is our message?”

Activist John Strafford said Tory voters had defected to Nigel Farage’s UKIP over immigration, adding: “Unless we take action on them they are going to stay with UKIP and not come back.”

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Some political views

In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a government.
John Adams
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of government…..... But then I repeat myself.
Mark Twain

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
George Bernard Shaw
Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.
Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton at Georgetown University
I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
Winston Churchill
Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian

Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you!
Pericles (430 B.C.)
If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free!
P.J. O'Rourke


If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.
Mark Twain
In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.
Voltaire (1764)
Talk is cheap………...except when government does it.
Anonymous
The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin.
Mark Twain
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.
Aesop