Monday, 31 August 2015

Matthew Elliot - not fit to be part of EU Out - he really wants reform, not exit.

Matthew Elliot is pushing himself forwards to lead the EU Out campaign -

But he is actually a reformer! He is not fundamentally opposed to the EU - he just thinks it really needs improving:

He also called for the referendum to be delayed to maximise the chances of the UK staying in:

So given the right offer he could decide that the UK should stay *in* the EU after all!! He clearly can't be trusted.

His other claim is that he won the No2AV referendum... But even this is not true - Matthew Elliot did not win the AV vote - it was always pretty much a cert to go the way it did - and the Yes2AV campaign was led by the Electoral Reform Society who were on record as saying AV was a very bad system and only STV was worth considering - so there was no campaign support for AV anyway.

With the EU all the big money will be on 'in' - because the EU control 90% of the 'big money'. Elliot has also said he wants to see what Cameron comes back with - so further down the line Elliot could changes sides if the 'right' deal is offered.

Out need leaders who know there is *nothing* that can make the EU acceptable - so Camerons renegotiation is of zero significance.

Wednesday, 12 August 2015

Letter to my MP - 52 Olympic Athletes granted Asylum??

Dear,

I was very surprised to read the following regarding foreign athletes who came to the UK to compete for their countries in the 2012 Olympic games in London:

"A total of 52 were granted refugee status while, of the thirty refused, two won on appeal but only ten were deported from the UK."

in the article posted here:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597288/Asylum-seekers-Olympics-2012-London-still-Britain-refugee

The headline was about the 18 who are still on the run from the UK authorities so have not been deported, however, my surprise was that 52 were granted refugee status.

We now know that government departments often make mistakes, are often run inefficiently and badly, and often try to cover up mistakes. So I am sure you will agree that it is essential that they can justify the actions they have taken, and justify them to the public that they serve.

Accordingly I would like to know how these 52 came to be allowed to enter the UK - supposedly representing their countries as the countries top athletes, when they actually made their applications, what each of them are claiming asylum from, and what evidence was gathered to support their claims.

I find it implausible that a competent government could be put in this position, I look forward to being shown to be wrong.

Regards

Paul Perrin

Monday, 10 August 2015

Kids Company - where oh where did the Church of England go so wrong? Jesus wept.

One of the stories Peter Hitches covers in his latest Mail on Sunday piece relates to the demise of Kids Company.

In his column he asks questions that I, myself, have also been asking - what actually did Kids Company do? What was it trying to do? How did it measure its success (or otherwise)? etc....

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2015/08/if-the-bearded-lefty-wins-its-the-tories-wholl-be-a-whisker-away-from-disaster.html

The bit that really jumped out at me was this:-
What do you think would happen to someone who set up a charity in the same part of London, offering abandoned children rules, morals, disciplined education, absolute prohibition of drugs, regular bedtimes, that sort of thing?

Isn't that exactly what the Church of England used to do (and is still supposed to be doing)? When did it stop? Will it now take the role back? Or will some other Christian organisation maybe?

He then says:-
Do you think millions of corporate and State money would arrive, or that Ministers and media figures would rush to its aid? No, nor do I.

Presumably forgetting that the Church of England are very wealthy, have Bishops in the House of Lords, their own publications etc...

The Church of England has dropped the ball - it is worried about its own internal gender equality and such tosh - and while it contemplates its navel, and focuses on the admin of the church that is simple a measns to an end, it completely fails in its end - that of spreading christan purpose, and doing so by example.

Jesus wept.