Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Have Faith

I welcome the Queen’s speech to the General Synod yesterday when she extolled the virtues of the Christian Faith when there is so much instability and uncertainty in the world. A quality of our country that should be celebrated at all times is that we live in communities of many faiths, where everyone enjoys equal privileges of citizenship including the total freedom of religion.

This country is, by law, a Christian country, but this does not mean we do not recognise or encourage other faiths. Sir Jonathan Sacks, the Chief Rabbi, has said that the Church of England is an umbrella beneath which shelter Judaism, Islam and other faiths.

So in the UK, all people, irrespective of race, background or faith can flourish under a Monarch who has outlined her unifying role as Head of the Church. So as I said in my last blog entry, the onslaught on our Christian values and traditions must stop – it creates discord and resentment and does nothing to encourage integration and cross-faith harmony.

Monday, November 14, 2005

PC Madness

For those of you that know me, you will already be aware that Political Correctness is one subject that really gets me riled. I find it unecessary and believe it causes more problems that it is supposed to solve.

Recently I learnt that I am no longer meant to addess an audience as Ladies and Gentlemen, as that may cause offence. OFFENCE TO WHOM? I am now supposed to use the PC address of 'Women and Men'. Well I won't.

I read that yesterday in Walton, Essex, the traditional firing of a salute to mark the start and end of the Last Post had been cancelled for Rememberance Sunday on the grounds of Health and Safety. Don't laugh - it's true. The local RNLI used to fire maroons, but they have been advised that debris could blow back to the shore by the wind, causing a health and safety crisis. What a disgrace.

And of course, as we get closer to Christmas we will get the rampant PC assault on Christianity. The Red Cross still can't sell Christmas cards in their shops as it may cause offence to non-Chrisitians. Lowestoft Council have banned Christmas lights in the town as they do not fit with their policy on equality and diversity!! We are no longer supposed to use the term BC (Before Christ), we have to use BP (Before Present) and staff at the Inland Revenue have been banned from helping a Christian charity.

Surely it is not racist or exclusive that in a Chrsitian country with a Christian history we are allowed to practice a Christian faith. I know of Christian schools that have recently celebrated Diwali and Eid - and so they should - so I totally oppose this unwarranted secularist onslaught on Christian traditions.

The really annoying thing is that this hapless PC army are invariably funded by the taxer payer. New Zealand have recently appointed a Political Correctness Eradication spokesman - maybe we are at the stage where we need to do the same.

Let me know what you think and if you hear of any really absurd examples of Political Correct nonsense, please let me know.

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

The Police say.......

The entire justification for the Government's plans to detain terrorist suspects for 90 days without trial is that the police are calling for the legislation.

Fair enough. I believe the police should be listened to, but they must also be challenged to make sure that their demands do not excessively infringe on the wider public's civil liberties.

So the government always listens to the views of the police do they?

Cheshire's Chief Constable has said that his Force is ‘overstretched’ and relaxing alcohol laws will ‘aggravate the problem’, and his views are shared by many Chief Constables across the country. So why does the government choose to ignore the police on this issue and persist with meddling with the licensing laws?

It is evidently clear that the Government only listens to the police when it is in their interest - otherwise, the government knows best!!

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Respect and Parents' rights

I was absolutely delighted today to hear that Mrs Axon, a parent of teenage daughters, is taking the government to the High Court over its guidelines that allow doctors to advise and perform abortions on teenage girls without parent's consent.

Many of you will know that I have always vehemently opposed these absurd guidelines. The government talks about encouraging respect, especially amongst the young, yet they allow children to totally bypass their parents over what will be a physically and mentally traumatic decision.

As a father, I am only too well aware of the absurdity of the situation created by this government. My little girls' nursery cannot administer Calpol if they develop a temperature unless their mother or I give specific signed approval. Similarly they cannot use a sticky plaster on a cut. If my girls were 14, they could not have their tonsils or appendix removed without signed parental consent. Yet when it comes to advise on contraception, (including the Pill), sexually transmited diseases or abortions, parents can be kept totally in the dark. This undermines the rights of parents and breaks down the whole psychological support structure of the family unit.

There may be a small number of cases where it would be detrimental to the youngs girl's well-being for the parents to know she had become pregnant, but that is not a justification for over-riding every parent and family.

I just hope Mrs Axon wins her case, but even if she doesn't, at least she has brought this ridiculous example of excessive government interference into family life to the front pages.

Friday, November 04, 2005


Yesterday I was asked if I thought it was right that David Blunkett had resigned.

My answer is NO..........................he should have been sacked.

Tony Blair's decision to continue to support Blunkett and fail to enforce the Code of Conduct that he set up is a sign of a desperate leader and a very very poor judgement indeed.

The question now is, "How long before Blair goes?" Surely it is a matter of sooner rather than later.

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Code of Conduct!!!!!!!

In 1998, Tony Blair told the British people of his ‘strong personal commitment to restoring the bond of trust between the British people and their government.' One of the measures he put in place to ensure this trust was built, was a code of conduct for ministers. The Prime Minister then went on to say, 'We are all here to serve and we must all serve honestly and in the interests of those who gave us our positions of trust. I will expect all ministers to work within the letter and spirit of the code.’

That is, of course, until one of his cabinet ministers breaches the Code, not once, but FIVE times. The Prime Minister's response to David Blunkett's recent business transactions is to say they were 'mistakes' No they weren't. They were a breach of the code and therefore should result in dismissal.

I do not support witch hunts, and this is not one. There is no point is setting up a Ministerial Code of Conduct if FIVE breaches of that code has no consequences.

So much for a 'purer than pure' approach to government. This is sleaze that the Prime Minister is endorsing, which either goes to show he is making a very poor judgement, or that his priority is to protect his boys and not to restore the British People's trust in politics and politicians.

Is this episode showing that it is time for both Blunkett and Blair to go?