A LEADER OR AN ELECTED MAYOR......HAVE YOUR SAY

A SWINE OF A MAN

LORD PETER SMITH

An opportunity will arise come May 2010 to oust Lord Peter Smith from his very own Wigan Council throne and rid - once and for all - this pompous, autocratic and bigoted fool from his self made ivory tower were he regally gloats from at our expense.

In fact, we have two bites at the cherry to dethrone Lord 'Ha Ha' but the first option is to change the way we are currently governed.

You have the offer below to read for yourself about this issue and one which is taken directly from the council's Borough Life quarterly magazine.

A Leader or an Elected Mayor....Have Your Say Here:

It is very evident reading this article that the council lackeys who wrote this seem particularly ill at ease with the potential threat of the disposal of their 'fuhrer' and thus resort to using such propagandistic text to dispel and rubbish the option of a directly elected mayor.

Obviously, by giving you and me - us mere mortals a chance to change the way we are 'dictated' to, is a definate no-no for the gestapo in the chambers! For it will certainly rip the heart out of Lord Smith's already bulging but dubious wallet as well as having an even more devastating effect on the rest of Peter's 'suidae' family of corrupt hangers-on or more commonly known as 'his' employees and co-conspirators on his select ten cabinet. And those who would have no place or use in the 'real' world if it wasn't for the huge creation of non-jobs throughout the council corridors and beyond and all at the behest of Lord Smith! How are we doing by the way Mr Elliot Brown? And I certainly mustn't forget to mention our Myra!! Wink...Wink...Nudge...Nudge... Say no more!!

And lest we forget that it was also Lord Peter Smith who orchestrated the ludicrous doomed to failure "congestion charge" debacle, and this whilst holding the position of head of the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities.

The cost of promoting the 'YES' to the 'C' Charge campaign ran into £millions and is now another unjust financial burden around not only the necks of the Wigan and Leigh taxpayers, but, additionally on all the others who so happen to be living in Greater Manchester as a whole.

These are the words of Lord Smith quoted on the day before the Congestion Charge results:

(Lord Peter Smith, leader of Wigan council, chipped in to the debate on the Queen's speech in the upper chamber yesterday.)

"I have resisted any attempt to speak on transport," he said. "One of my roles is chair of the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities. We conducted a referendum campaign on a transport package and I have spoken far too much about transport.

"The results will be out at lunchtime on Friday when I will see whether I will be depressed all weekend..."

I hope you are still depressed! No wonder Smithy's corner want to steer clear of any referendum going on this past drubbing he got!

You can also sense their unease as the article continues by these comments:

. An elected mayor would be a very different animal to the non-political ceremonial mayor that Wigan has had for hundreds of years.

. Once again, the mayor would be in power for four years but the difference is that there would be no way for the council or the public to remove him or her during that period. A directly elected mayor doesn’t have to be a councillor and may not even have the support of a majority of councillors.

.There could be difficulties if the elected mayor is unable to command the support of a majority of councillors.

. Another issue is the cost of holding a separate election for an elected mayor.

I really don't think the matter of cost should be brought into the equation by the council, certainly as we see such wastage of our monies on the likes of the ByoU and Rafiki/Motswako projects that they have selfishly contributed to over the decade or so.

A brief but interesting history of elected mayors can be found here: Elected Mayors in United Kingdom

To date there have been 37 referendums on whether to establish an elected mayor in English local authorities. Twelve have been passed and 25 rejected by the voters.

To cause a referendum, the normal procedure is for the council to request it, which has happened in 22 cases. In 14, the voters themselves have requested a referendum by petition and in one (Southwark) central Government forced the holding of a referendum

I think this is too good an opportunity to pass over and would urge that we all get our heads together and start promoting a referendum by petition forthwith. And let them know we have all had enough.

The other option we have at our disposal is to beat Lord Ha Ha in May 2010 when is tenure of councillor for the Leigh West ward is also up for grabs!

JUST FOR CHRIS HILL

In the early 1980s, with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy, scientists at the United Kingdom’s University of East Anglia established the Climate Research Unit (CRU) to produce the world’s first comprehensive history of surface temperature. It’s known in the trade as the “Jones and Wigley” record for its authors, Phil Jones and Tom Wigley, and it served as the primary reference standard for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) until 2007. It was this record that prompted the IPCC to claim a “discernible human influence on global climate.”

Putting together such a record isn’t at all easy. Weather stations weren’t really designed to monitor global climate. Long-standing ones were usually established at points of commerce, which tend to grow into cities that induce spurious warming trends in their records. Trees grow up around thermometers and lower the afternoon temperature. Further, as documented by the University of Colorado’s Roger Pielke Sr., many of the stations themselves are placed in locations, such as in parking lots or near heat vents, where artificially high temperatures are bound to be recorded.

So the weather data that go into the historical climate records that are required to verify models of global warming aren’t the original records at all. Jones and Wigley, however, weren’t specific about what was done to which station in order to produce their record, which, according to the IPCC, showed a warming of 0.6° +/– 0.2°C in the 20th century.

Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that “+/–” came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones’s response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”

Reread that statement, for it is breathtaking in its anti-scientific thrust. In fact, the entire purpose of replication is to “try and find something wrong.” The ultimate objective of science is to do things so well that, indeed, nothing is wrong.

Read it all:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTBiMTRlMDQxNzEyMmRhZjU3ZmYzODI5MGY4ZWI5OWM=&w=MA==

TREVOR PHILLIPS' CREW [EHRC]

I have several regular internet correspondents. One of them had recently read this and so decided to carry out a little test. The correspondence between me and him, and him and Trevor Phillips' crew  (EHRC) went like this:

**name** : "I SENT THIS":

"Dear Sir

Would you kindly let me know what the precise membership criteria are for the above?

Thank you kindly for your time."

[referring to the Dumfries and Galloway crowd in the linked BNP article]

"THEY [EHRC}REPLY WITH THIS":

"Dear Sir,

Thank you for bringing this organisation to our attention. It is an organisation we are aware of and a preliminary assessment of the issues you have raised are being carried out to enable the Commission to assess whether, and if so what, enforcement action is appropriate in this case. The EHRC values all the information it receives from members of the public and others about possible breaches of equality and human rights legislation. 
Because of the need to maintain confidentiality during any initial assessments it is not possible to provide you with individual feedback on this matter. The Commission will however publish details of any enforcement action taken where it is legally possible and appropriate to do so.

RMConlon" [might be a typo there - it could be Condon]

"says f**k all"

I suggest he should write to them again, tell them he's from Trinidad, and ask what the membership criteria are for the British National Party. Bet he gets a more informative reply than the above nonsense. In fact - any of you could do that ...

Let me know what they say.

I detect the stench of an almighty double standard.

Morg
.

SURVEILLANCE

Picked up this little warning while wandering around – very well put. We should all at least note the warning itself. The original can be found here if you scroll down to the very bottom.

 

This is from a Swedish website. It’s written by a Swede who doesn’t have English as his first language, so spelling and grammatical errors are to be expected. He certainly speaks/writes English better than I speak Swedish (stereotype alert// which Danes say is incoherent anyway).

 

Actually, the blog and comments – quite long – have some interesting things to say in their own right, though I very much doubt he’s a Swedish Nationalist.

 

Then again, we’re British; so what can anyone tell us about being under surveillance all the time?

 

Survaillance

WARNING!*

E-mail, phones and ALL Internet Communications to and from Sweden, or via servers in Sweden, is monitored by the National Defence Radio Establishment. This information is then sold/shared with other nations.

*this is not only relevant for Sweden anymore, but my birth nation is no longer a democracy. How long before your country joins this fascist wet dream?

How do we tell if our internet traffic is/isn’t being routed through Swedish servers?


Morg
P.S. I thought Gary in Liverpool might be interested
.

THE LAWYERS ARE ASSES

The laughable fine on "Baroness" Scotland for falling foul of a law she helped to draft is another example of how low justice has sunk in our country.
The "Baroness" herself is an immigrant but on account of our stupid laws is Attorney General.


Was there no native British lawyer competent to hold this position? Of course there was.
She was given this position of authority on account of her ethnic origins and presumably to demonstrate the government's diversity credentials.


She does not seem to be very bright as she was unable to detect the illegal status of her employee, a crime which under her law is considered serious enough to merit a maximum fine of £10,000.
On the other hand she would presumably have sympathy with immigrants, whether legal or not being one herself.


That people such as this lady should have such power is a disgrace and shows she has been promoted way above her capabilities, and the folly of giving immigrants any power. She would be quite happy for our country to accomodate millions more immigrants.


The Attorney General is supposed to uphold the law and protect the interests of the people. This she clearly has not done.
It is often said by the "Left" that people who were born here should be entitled to remain as British citizens on account of that.


Well she was not born here, so she should not only be sacked for her criminality but be deprived of her citizenship and deported to the country of her birth.
She is not a fit person to sit in judgement on us, even if she were clever as she, by dint of her country of birth will never put the interests of our country first.

Send her back now.

THE SCALES OF INJUSTICE.

The jury system has for hundreds of years been the guarantor of the integrity of our justice system.
To have one's guilt or innocence decided by 12 of one's fellow citizens instead of the king or government as in other countries made justice fair and eqitable and the cornerstone of our democracy.


Sometimes, especially recently the government has been thwarted in its aims by this system and moves were afoot to abolish it.
People from all walks of life and religion were obliged if called to do jury service and this task although sometimes inconvenient and irksome has helped preserve British Justice.


Now it seems there are some who are not considered fit to be jurors--members of the BNP. One of our members has been told that he is not suitable to be a jurer because of his membership of the party.

A person can be a communist, supporter of terrorism, the IRA or even a recent arrival to these shores and still be a jurer but a member of the BNP (who supports no foreign power or terrorist organisation) obviously in the eyes of the authorities would be unable to give an unbiased verdict and thus beyond the pale.


BUT WHAT ABOUT THE OPPOSITE SCENARIO?

Would a Labour supporter or muslim be able to be impartial to a known BNP supporter?
OR DOES JUSTICE FOR US NOT MATTER?

"WORKLESSNESS"

A number of years ago when I went to the local corner shop to purchase a pint of milk, a small bread loaf, 1lb of potatoes, a couple of carrots, a small onion and a lads mag to boot! The new attractive female shop assistant at the counter said: "Oh! you must live on your own?"

I replied: "Yes! How did you guess?"

She said: You're an UGLY git!

Charming!

In the latest edition of Borough Life, a quarterly publication of Wigan Metro's propaganda onslaught to highlight what a wonderful job the boys and girls from our council's Elliot Brown 'newspeak' fraternity have achieved; was a lovely article on page 14, titled " Getting Wigan Back to Work!"

Now, below are the very words that thrusts this article smack between the eyes!

Borough Life begins: IT USED TO BE CALLED UNEMPLOYMENT. THESE DAYS IT IS KNOWN AS "WORKLESSNESS!"

To be honest I am totally flummoxed with the above re-wording of unemployment! Can anyone enlighten me please?

Boasting that a MAJOR conference in Wigan recently highlighted two key tasks for the borough - removing the barriers to work or training and encouraging more people to set up their own businesses.

The conference took place against the backdrop of a warts and all (no doubt GENITAL! Ed.) survey of the borough's economy by economic forecasters Experian.

It goes on to say that: they predicted that Wigan, because of it's manufacturing and construction traditions, would fare worse than places like Salford and Manchester which have a more varied economy!

No S**t Sherlock?

It also goes on to say: In the medium term there will be modest growth - but not before a dip this year and next year which will continue to have a big impact on jobs till 2014.

Now, apart from a photo of a good looking local lass who runs an "environmental consultancy" mid-way through the page, the next article slaps me around the chops!

" Shopping for skills and jobs"

Now please bear with me on this, and lets skip the inevitable and stay focused? But, Anthony Mohammed, has set up the council's skill shop and a new one has just opened in Wigan's Grand Arcade.

He continues: These unique places 'one stop shops' for jobs, education and training. they offer personal support and individuals even have their own adviser.

The new shop, which will be open weekdays as well as Thursday evenings and Saturdays, builds on the success...........blah......blah.......blah.........

He added: "We want the shop to be friendly and attractive place to visit and get the help they need. It's very EXCITING to be in the heart of a popular shopping centre and ALREADY WE 'VE HAD 500 VISITORS in such a short space of time."

If someone is popping in to town, can they please get me an off the peg Warehouse Managers job about 30k, a pack of streaky bacon, half a dozen eggs and a small packet of frozen peas!

Cheers, I'll sort you out when you get back!