Thursday, 29 November 2012

Miracle : Dog cured through prayer

2013 house prices forecast to remain stagnant

The lies perpetrated about divorce

In the following article it is the belief of the government that " ‘it’s not the separation itself that can cause harm to your child, it’s the level of conflict that they see between parents’.

So we are saying that if every single family on earth separated very sweetly not one single child would be harmed! Utter rubbish! Utter lies!

Thank you Jesus : no-one knifed or shot in New York in a day for the first time

Net migration drops by 25%

Banks have massive (£60bn!) black hole

(even after the £375bn money that the Bank of England printed for them!)

Leveson delivers his report on Press Freedom

Ryanair to bring in a new charge for using credit card

Isn't it interesting how over time such companies, which start off as cheap no frills deals, slowly crank up the prices and complexities.  It must be a human trait; that once you have the ability to secure profits you look for ways to increase such profits.

How to write slurs and untruths about matters

The headline of this article is " Don’t let newspaper victims set the rules, ex-minister warns"

And then it begins "Victims of press harassment should not be given the chance to rewrite the laws on press freedom, the former Cabinet minister Peter Lilley warns. "

But we know that is exactly what is not happening! It is Leveson who is about to report on what needs to be done, not the victims.

Untruthscaremongering, that is what this is. I do not know what the real point of this article is, or why the minister has said this.  If it is his way of saying to Leveson : please ignore in your report any aspects of what the victims of press abuse would like, then we have a problem, because that is precisely why the Leveson enquiry was set up. 

To quote him he says "But I think it’s wrong in principle to say that victims of wrongdoing should have the right to rewrite our laws to deal with offences far beyond anything they suffered, especially when the offences they suffered were covered by law and don’t need any independent regulator. "

But they don't have the right! They are not rewriting the laws. So why is he saying this?

This is weird, to say something that has no meaning.

The rest of the article is quite pointless too. It is saying what the whole of UK already knows : it is not good to have a state controlled press. There is no real detail.

A very weird article indeed

The EU says it's illegal to have minimum pricing on alcohol

Good old EU!

Wednesday, 28 November 2012

You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

UKIP candidate speaks out against gay couples adopting

I'm glad someone has spoken out against this.

Train fares to rise above inflation

Millions of people to work beyond retirement age

How corporations outsource their work to avoid paying staff or treating staff well

Three million people earning less than a living weekly wage

Osborne is very thankful though, as he is getting his larger and larger flexible workforce.

In years to come I pray a new form of reasoning comes into English thought and parlance, in the way that it came in when slavery was banished. This is not the same as slavery, but it is another form of the ruling elite treating people how they want to within the paramaters of a legal framework.

NHS introduces zero hours contracts

To think that this country wants SECURITY and INCREASED INCOME.

But its people have to be INSECURE and LESS INCOME

Role on the hypocrisy!!!!

Amazon paying very little corporation tax compared to its sales

Like I've said before, immorality cannot be legislated against always. We rely on the individual's conscience, but as we live in a fallen world, such reliance is unsustainable.  The cost of freedom is living a legalistic world, not a moral world.

Government only focus now is growth and jobs

I wonder if that was what they were taught and believed in as they grew up, rather than outsourcing, contracting, flexible work force, FTSE100, share price value.

The terrible impact of rising heating costs

Many many young girls going onto websites promoting dieting

Concerns over forthcoming Leveson report splits the government

"The Prime Minister has already signalled he is minded to accept the report if it is not "heavy-handed" or "bonkers" but he is being squeezed on all sides. " I doubt Leveson would draft something bonkers, given his intellectual capacity. And the word 'heavy handed'; well without knowing what the PM means, it can mean anything it wants to once the report is produced.

Now just read this "
Some of his Cabinet members, including Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, and Eric Pickles, the Communities Secretary, are openly against state regulation, while the Liberal Democrats and Maria Miller, the Culture Secretary, are pushing for a "tougher" option to keep the press in check. "

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS want to keep the press in check! LIBERAL!!

So the word LIBERAL no longer means Liberal in the old sense.  The word liberal now means to "reduce someone's freedom". It used to be to "increase someone's freedom".


Like good old Pontius Pilate "
Sources said the Prime Minister is now considering a free vote in the House of Commons allowing MPs to follow their conscience over the issue. The Government could see itself defeated if the Liberal Democrats team up with Labour to push for tough regulation. "

So the church has to 'get with the programme'; where as the House of Commons is being allowed to 'follow their conscience'

The art of politics is to use a reasoning for the outcome you are looking for. 

It seems to me the original aims of the Leveson enquiry have all but disappeared.

In a world whereby we rely on one's conscience to curb one's behaviour, as well as laws to put absolute parameters on such behaviour, such a system works if the individual and collective conscience somehow (not knowing how) keeps to such curbs. But when the collective and individual conscience decays, the weakness of the law shows itself.

If our laws become equal to our own conscience we are living in a terrible world.

More older married couples divorcing

Very sad...

Rotherham Council told foster couple to keep quiet

In this article Rotherham council is angry at how the story has been portrayed, but notice how Rotherham does not appear to have denied that the story is true, or said that the foster parents are lying.

Cheap Alcohol Offers to be banned

This is good. It sends the right message.

There will be a minimum price per unit of alcohol.

I wonder how the alcohol industry will respond to this.

Read how a spokesperson for the industry responded. Sounds precisely like a politician opposing the elected government :

"Miles Beale, the chief executive of the Wines and Spirits Trade Association said: “Minimum unit pricing will punish responsible consumers with higher prices and it will do nothing to address the causes of alcohol misuse.
“It will push up prices for millions of hard-working families who are already feeling the pinch – the busy parent who buys a bottle of wine to relax after a hard week or pensioners enjoying the odd tipple in the evening.” "

Let's hope the busy parent or the pensioner is also thinking to themselves : at least my streets may be safer as a result of this.

The more we live in a society which doesn't see itself as a society, the more this sort of talk will come out.

Many Comet staff to lose their jobs before Christmas

How we now worship wealth and wealth creators more than fairness

This article discusses how when Labour introduced the 50p tax for the wealthy, the number of people who declared their income over £1m dropped from 16,000 to 6,000.

The article shows no evidence that these people left the country, but that is the conclusion drawn.

Mmmm....what other options are open to people to reduce their tax liability, other than leaving the country?

The underlying current in this article and in the Conservatives, and worryingly in Labour, is that wealth is all that matters.

We seem to have a hieracrchy of the system :

Wealth : Creators : Powerful : Influential : Less TAX

Poor : Least Influential : Fairness : More TAX : Less benefits.

The ideology is "What do we need to do to increase GDP and keep wealth creators in our country". 

If it is true that some 10,000 millionaires left the UK because of the 50p tax rate, perhaps this is right? And perhaps it says something good about the 6,000 who did stay?

Monday, 26 November 2012

Thought police continues

You are thought to be racist and unfit to foster children in Rotherham if you are a member of the UKIP party

Apple to sue Samsung over its tablet

The battle continues

Domestic Abuse in the UK

UK Austerity to last till 2018

Mark Carney new Governor of Bank of England

UK economic growth forecast to drop

Friday, 23 November 2012

Big Brother : exam seminars may be filmed

Will the UK go this way?

Miracle : boy survives horrific car crash

Loneliness and isolation a big problem in the UK

Persecution of the church continues

Press regulation report by Leveson to come out next week

10%-20% of elderly care homes and hospitals giving poor care

Thursday, 22 November 2012

A sign of our times

First Chief Constable to resign following election of Police Commissioner

Unintended consequences?

Corporations pay a smaller percentage of the overall UK tax take

EU budget talks still with problems

New BBC director general appointed

We never wanted weekly bin collections!

Apparently we don't want weekly bin collections. Apparently we have been pining for fortnightly collections for years and years whilst we had weekly collections.

Rewriting history again!!

Wednesday, 21 November 2012

21/11/12 The persecution of the church in the UK by the state began

How the world wants the church to bow down to it

Today, 21/11/12, is the day that persecution of the church by the state began.

"In a rare intervention into religious matters, David Cameron said he was “very sad” about the outcome and challenged the Church to “get with the programme”.

His comments came on a day of self-loathing for the established church with senior leaders, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, warning that the failure to confront institutional sexism threatens the church's very future.

In an impassioned speech at the General Synod – the last before his retirement next month – Dr Rowan Williams vividly illustrated the depth of the current crisis facing his organisation,admitting that the Church of England loses credibility every day it fails to approve women bishops.

“We have, to put it very bluntly, a lot of explaining to do,” he told delegates. “Whatever the motivation for voting yesterday, whatever the theological principle on which people acted and spoke, the fact remains that a great deal of this discussion is not intelligible to our wider society. Worse than that, it seems as if we are wilfully blind to some of the trends and priorities of that wider society.”

He added: ”We have some explaining to do, we have as a result of yesterday undoubtedly lost a measure of credibility in our society.“

During Prime Minister’s Questions, Mr Cameron backed MPs who attacked the Synod vote.

He told the Commons: “I’m a strong supporter of women bishops. I’m very sad about the way the vote went yesterday and I’m particularly sad for the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, because I know he saw this as the major campaign he wanted to achieve at the end of his excellent tenure of that office.”

He added: “I’m very clear the time is right for women bishops, it was right many years ago. They need to get on with it, as it were, and get with the programme.”

So the Archbishop of Canterbury is a mouthpiece for the state.

To say that those in the church who tirelessly help the poor, the sick, the needy, who also believe that women should not be bishops are "wilfully blind to some of the trends and priorities of that wider society".  How can they be wilfully blind! It is obvious what the priority is for this wider society!

And let's remember that Cameron is also pro gay marriage.

Perhaps Christ's church is not the same as the Church. 

"Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. "

How Newspeak invades dealing with terrible issues

This article in my view has less clarity than clarity.

The headline says "45 children a day at risk from sexual exploitation by gangs".

Are these in addition to those children who are being exploited?
Are these in addition to those children not being exploited?
Are these in addition to those children not being exploited by gangs?
Are these the same 45 children per day?
Is it 45 different children per day?
Are they exploited one day and then it stops?

"Local authorities, police forces and health professionals are ignoring warning signs displayed by at-risk teenagers, who are too often seen as problematic or complicit in their own abuse,"

"As many as 16,500 children were identified as being at "high risk" of sexual exploitation – displaying three or more warning signs including running away from home, drug or alcohol misuse and criminality."

So in the whole article the only information we are told is "displaying three or more warning signs including running away from home, drug or alcohol misuse and criminality".

So rather than using the article clearly detailing what practitioners are meant to be doing it, how we the public can help, how to spot the signs, what to do when we do see the signs; it justs goes on and on about such children being at risk, how more can be done, without saying what can be done.

This is so weird!!!!!

So The Guardian is clearly not an agent to help reduce this, even though  clearly we are all meant to wake up to this problem.

This article does begin to suggest how children can be protected:

So what do we need to do to protect children? What are the essentials of an effective system?
• Respect what children and young people say – abuse is invariably about the abuse of power within an established relationship. The bias of the system must therefore facilitate and encourage children to share their concerns. This applies especially to vulnerable children who are frequently ignored or stereotyped. Young offenders are particularly vulnerable and their allegations frequently ignored, as recent media examples have shown.
• Make safeguarding everybody's business – we must all be alert to the concerns of children and young people and cannot leave everything to specialist agencies.
• Focus on the child's needs and the family's situation. Family lives are not divided arbitrarily between the agencies and the structures we have created. Agencies must work together to provide safe ways to help children and family members, in ways which also make sense to them.
• Work together and share information – no child died because information was shared.
• Enforce a clear structure for joint working between public agencies within each locality and across local boundaries. Effective management of all crises requires a predetermined set of procedures and organisational relationships. Child protection investigations and management of chronic child maltreatment are no different. It is sadly the case that organisations do not tend to work instinctively in partnership unless there is a clear and mandatory framework which supports this approach and requires co-operation.
• Apply learning from research, formal inquiries and past evidence about practice.
• Create a culture of respect within agencies – respect for parents and children – and also for staff. Ensure practice guidance is clear, coherent, consistent, legal, accessible and comprehensible. It must allow space for judgement and creativity but also provide a sufficiently coherent framework for co-operation between practitioners in the many different agencies involved. A culture of staff bullying by management reduces effectiveness and increases risk for children.
• Recognise this all costs money and needs professionals with time, skills and support.

Is the interpretation of history being re written?

In this article the head teacher of Eton says, or is being represented as saying or meaning,

"Pupils’ creativity is being stifled by a system that still measures students’ ability by “sitting everyone down in rows in an exam hall” for several hours, said Tony Little.
He called for traditional pen-and-paper tests taken at 16 to be scrapped in all subjects other than English and maths to give students more time and space to properly develop a range of skills.
Speaking at a conference staged by the National Education Trust, Mr Little said that existing GCSE exams were increasingly outdated, particularly at a time when most pupils were expected to remain in education up to the age of 18.
The case for retaining A-levels was more powerful because they were used by universities as part of the higher education admissions process, he said.
But he insisted there was “no good reason” why students had to be assessed in “this very Victorian way” at 16."

So what we are saying here is that our ancestors were badly taught and they were effected by it negatively.

So if that is true, how are we in a position to know it is wrong? How has this enlightenment come to pass?

Are we now demeaning Queen Victoria or the times that she led this nation?

And will the future institutions say the same of Queen Elizabeth II?

What is going wrong?

We are destroying ourselves.  Why? 

The police state continues into our lives.

"Internet service providers (ISPs) will soon be required to inform customers if their web connection is being used for illegal infringement of copyright, making it more important than ever for consumers to understand their own behaviour online."

The web is less and less than an open free space. It is becoming an owned space; owned by those with money and power to tell those with less money and less power how the internet should and should not be used.

In a wonderful world I wouldn't mind this if those in power lived by the rules they put upon us.

But this is not the world we live in.

It is now a matter of time before the internet ends up being a tool for the state to control our lives.

Free thinking will one day go into the confines of whispering into our neighbours ear, so long as we have not been enchipped for the state to listen into our conversations; in which case we will find means of letting out our thoughts, even if it includes praying to almighty God of our Jesus Christ.

Premier Foods to cut 900 jobs

EU fails to agree over sorting out Greek government debt

Church says no to women bishops

1 Timothy 2 11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Women Imams in Islam is a controversial subject

In Judaism it is also controversial. It appears that parts of Judaism accept women rabbis, and others don't.

It is possible for a the Dalai Lama to be female

It appears that women druids exist too

Female freemasons are controversial

Polly Toynbee is President of the British Humanist Association.

I cannot for the life of me think that Christ is carving a church , His Bride, which serves and follows the world. But I do know that the way that Christ does things is so surprising and anachronistic and paradoxical. He will come like a thief in the night.  He says He will. He came like a thief in the night when He was born, and Herod did what he could to kill Him, but His Father always led Him the way He was meant to go, despite all protestations and actions made by us weak human beings.

Perhaps His Church will go the way of His Life : utterly destroyed, and then it will rise again, a new body, a new life. And if that is the way I go; ending up fully subservient to atheistic living, then I will fully deserve the worst of punishments.

There is absolutely nothing we can do do stop God's will.

As time goes by it becomes more and more difficult to understand His word.  And because we live in sin, because we have back slided, it always gives the world the excuse to say : you're hyprocrits anyway.

Somehow we have to find a way of accepting, yes we do sin, but that does not mean , because we sin we should sin more!  But that is what the world implores us to do. It is what we implore ourselves to do! It is like being born into a seedy world, becoming inured to it, and then picking and choosing which bits we want to stay seedy, less seedy, more seedy. We just cannot save ourselves! And I almost feel too insulting to God to even use His Words to say that! I am lost in my own lostness. But even through all that Christ still sets us free from our sins, He still enables us to be righteous before His Father.

On an individual level it is a relief, but how does this exist beyond me and into this world?  Is our church going to end up being a collective of individuals each of us lost in our ways seeking redemption, having decided, through sin, modernisation, equality, diversity, inuration, to all but ignore God's Word except the name Jesus?  Is that what the church will end up being. just "Jesus". Only the name "Jesus" will be the only accepted thing of the Word of God. All other aspects will be up for debate?

If this is true then perhaps John 1, for now, is true "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.".

But elsewhere in the Bible it tells us that God will put His Laws into our hearts.  So why is my heart not enacting His Laws? Why?

When one has suffered much in life, you thank yourself that you were a child once. A child who has suffered for 2 years has accumulated less suffering than a child who has suffered for 10 years with the same form of suffering. The suffering really wears down on you.

The church is suffering, we bear its sufferings, and for some reason God is allowing this. As no one can overcome His Will.

12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

UK Government borrowing increases

Here we also have an example of Newspeak

The headline says "UK public borrowing jumps in blow for Chancellor ".  When I read that I thought, we the public had increased our use of credit cards and loans and mortgages.

But that is not the case in this article.

It is actually that "The Government borrowed £8.6bn compared with economists’ forecasts of £6bn,"

Here are a couple of articles about the impact of massive government debt on the economy :

Another expenses scandal

Tuesday, 20 November 2012

The more happy you are the wealthier you are likely to be

More and more of us are now worshipping mammon.

But such a possibility is not possible for all, unless you believe in communism or utopia or heaven on earth.  Politicians and the ruling elite definitely don't believe in that; if they did they'd tax the richer more!

The danger with this is the following : you know why you are poor don't you : you're not happy enough. 

I'm thankful there is another path, whereby our minds are transformed to pursue love and truth, and it is accessible to everyone on earth. You don't need money, you don't need happiness, you just need to make the choice.

MPs barring release of expenses details

Is this doublethink about cannabis by former minister Jacqui Smith?

In this article we read :

She told the Radio Times: 'I’m more sympathetic now to the argument that there are people who use cannabis without harm." [So she thinks it causes no harm, but we know that the harm principle is the basis for legislation, so this would mean decriminalising it. Notice though that she says she's more sympathetic. If we are to use the English language as I see it, this means she is sympathetic rather than less unsympathetic. What about psychosis or schizophrenia or anxiety or depression triggered in some as a result of the use of cannabis?]
'I don’t want tough messages being sent out by the law always translated into tough action against individuals.' [So we are learning that politicians want to continue breaking the relationship between laws and consequences, normally some form of punishment, which is to be used as a deterrant. So some laws will have no meaning it all]
" I don’t believe in decriminalisation or legalisation." [She doesn't say I don't want decriminalisation or legalisation, so given what she's said above, it seems she's resigning herself to having to decriminalise it, because it causes no harm.  But deep inside her, ie her conscience, she knows it should not be decriminalised. But the harm principle sometimes smashes through conscience, as sometimes conscience cannot hang off reason, where as the harm principle utterly hangs off reason]
'But knowing what I know now, I would resist the temptation to resort to the law to tackle the harm from cannabis. [So she accepts that we need to decriminalise it. ]
'Education, treatment and information, if we can get the message through, are perhaps a lot more effective.' [Effective at what? This is decriminalisation.]

My conclusion : it needs to be decriminalised, even though her conscience says otherwise.

Disabled women twice as likely to be domestically abused

Killing drones are inevitable

Looking back over the years I doubt drones will be banned. But if we can delay it for as long as possible, that would be good.

Energy companies to offer 4 tarriffs and provide us with the cheapest

Cameron's speech at CBI conference

Monday, 19 November 2012 10:00 AM
Read the full text of David Cameron's speech to business leaders at the 2012 CBI conference here:
I look around this room and see people I've been on trade missions with all around the world to Africa, China, India, Russia, Mexico, Brazil.

It's great to see Aggreko here – we were in Africa together and I'm glad you've sealed that deal in Cote d'Ivoire and are selling in one hundred countries today.

Diageo are here – we drank some whiskey in India and they liked it so much they bought the company

and now with that huge United Spirits deal they're the biggest premium drinks company in the world.

We've got Ian King here – just a couple of weeks ago I was in the Gulf with him and BAE Systems and we're stepping up our efforts with the Emiratis, the Omanis and the Saudis…

to keep on proving that the best fighter jets are made right here in the UK.

And of course, Roger – I am delighted that we were able to help Centrica get those deals done with Qatar and Norway.

Britain is selling to the world again

that is a vital part of my job – and what this economy needs.

I am also determined we make the most of the Olympics and Paralympics too.

In Sochi, in Russia, we've won 60 contracts ahead of their winter Games

designing the stadium, building the roof for the ice-skating rink, providing legal services and a lot more.

In Rio, in Brazil, we've already got over £70 million in deals done ahead of 2016.

Next year we're planning more trips to India and China – and I hope we'll have a lot of you there too.

Because frankly, we need this buccaneering, deal-making, hungry spirit now more than ever.

Britain is in a global race to succeed today

and you don't need me to tell you that.

Every day the people in this room are fighting to win contracts in Indonesia, India, Nigeria.

Every week you step off aeroplanes in the South and East and feel the pace of change there.

You know what the global race means because you're living it.

And I'm here today to tell you this Government gets it.

We get that the world is breathing down our neck.

And we get what British business needs.

You need us to deal with our deficit.

To cut business taxes so we can compete.

To have a proper industrial strategy to get behind the growth engines of the future.

To reform education so we turn out the brightest graduates and school leavers.

To reform welfare so it pays to work.

These are the key steps to Britain thriving in this global race.

But it's not just about policies – it's about attitude.

You need us to be tough. To be radical. To be fast.

I'm going to tell you what that means.

First, you need a Government that is tough; that can take the big, difficult decisions where they really matter

and nowhere does that matter more than on sorting out the deficit.

Never forget – we inherited a deficit bigger than Spain's. Bigger even than Greece.

This has meant taking decisions no other government had dreamed of taking before.

Capping welfare. Freezing child benefit. Raising the state retirement age.

Like I said – incredibly tough decisions.

But here's the thing.

Being tough on the deficit doesn't mean being simplistic – salami slicing budgets and taking an axe to everything.

It's got to mean prioritising the right things

backing enterprise, growth and business – even in the teeth of fierce opposition.

That's what we've done.

Yes, we've made significant cuts to some budgets, like the business department

but at the same time we've protected the science budget and funded record numbers of Apprenticeships.

Yes, we've had to put up some taxes

but we've cut taxes on business and entrepreneurs.

Corporation tax – coming down to the lowest rate in the G7

and yes, the top rate of tax has been cut too

because you cannot on the one hand say “Britain's open for business” and on the other have the highest top rate of tax in the G20.

So this is what being tough means.

Doing what's right for our future; taking on all the noisy lobby groups that want to pour money into today and forget about tomorrow.

And this approach is working.

The deficit – cut by 25 per cent.

Interest rates – at record lows.

A million new private sector jobs created in two years.

Exports up dramatically.

That's what tough government has helped deliver.

You needed government to be radical too – to shake up the status quo

especially in education.

As the CBI says in its report today, this is critical to thriving in the global race.

We took the view that massive structural change was needed.

Why? Because there were three big problems

failing schools; coasting schools; and that long-running failure in Britain on technical and vocational education.

Our changes are dealing with all three.

Instead of a monolithic state system with no real competition we've introduced free schools and created more than 2000 Academies – free to innovate and teach how they want.

This is having a massive effect already.

Inner-city Academies backed by sponsors – including business – in some of the poorest areas are getting extraordinary results – better than they're getting in the leafy, well-off suburbs.

We've been utterly intolerant of failure too

raising the bar on what we expect, and when a school falls below that bar – getting an Academy sponsor to take over as a matter of urgency.

We said we'd turn the 200 worst primary schools into Academies by the end of this year, we're on track to achieve it – and next year we're going to double that to 400.

As for technical education – new University Technical Colleges are opening

and we are clearing up the baffling array of qualifications and insisting on rigour.

Like I said – big structural changes.

By the end of this Parliament we're going to have thousands of new Academies, scores of new free schools

a system that is diverse, that welcomes competition and encourages innovation.

And we're having an all-out war on dumbing down too.

When we came to office primary school pupils went into their maths exam with a calculator – we're ending that.

We had GCSEs based largely on course-work and modules – no we're moving to more final exams.

And we inherited a system where just 15 per cent of pupils got good GCCEs in English, Maths, Science, a language and a humanity.

This is crazy. Employers like you are crying out for these skills.

There's not a job in the world where you don't need a good grasp of English and maths

so with the new English Baccalaureate we're putting them right back at the heart of education.

And all this isn't about looking back to the 1950s, it's about looking forward to help our children compete in this world

and we'll do whatever it takes to help them do that and help you get the bright, skilled workers you need.

So this government has been tough and we've been radical.

But there's something else you desperately need from us – and that's speed

because in this global race you are quick or you're dead.

Let me be clear: we have made some massive steps towards leaner, faster government.

Today the civil service is smaller than at any time since the Second World War.

Some departments have had central overheads cut by 30 per cent.

We've cut the number of quangos by nearly 200.

Last year, we cut wasteful spend by more than £5 billion

this year we're on track to save more than £8 billion.

And this goes all the way to the top.

The Cabinet I chair is now a Growth Cabinet

I go around that table and hold people to account for progress on everything from superfast broadband to house-building, in a way that has never happened before.

But we need to do more – because government can still be far too slow at getting stuff done.

You know the story.

The Minister stands on a platform like this and announces a plan

then that plan goes through a three month consultation period

there are impact assessments along the way

and probably some judicial reviews to clog things up further.

By the time the machinery of government has finally wheezed into action, the moment's probably passed.

Government has been like someone endlessly writing a ‘pros and cons' list as an excuse not to do anything at all.

Consultations, impact assessments, audits, reviews, stakeholder management, securing professional buy-in, complying with EU procurement rules, assessing sector feedback

this is not how we became one of the most powerful, prosperous nations on earth.

It's not how you get things done.

As someone once said, if Christopher Columbus had an advisory committee he would probably still be stuck in the dock.

So I am determined to change this.

Here's how:

Cutting back on judicial reviews.

Reducing government consultations.

Streamlining European legislation.

Stopping the gold-plating of legislation at home.

And quite simply: getting our roads and railways built more quickly.

Let me say a quick word on each.

First, judicial reviews.

This is a massive growth industry in Britain today.

Back in 1998 there were four and a half thousand applications for review

and that number almost tripled in a decade.

Of course some are well-founded – as we saw with the West Coast mainline decision.

But let's face it: so many are completely pointless.

Last year, an application was around 5 times more likely to be refused than granted.

We urgently needed to get a grip on this.

So here's what we're going to do.

Reduce the time limit when people can bring cases.

Charge more for reviews – so people think twice about time-wasting.

And instead of giving hopeless cases up to four bites of the cherry to appeal a decision, we will halve that to two.

Next, government consultations.

When we came to power there had to be a three month consultation on everything

and I mean everything, no matter how big or small.

So we are saying to Ministers: here's a revolutionary idea – you decide how long a consultation period this actually needs.

If you can get it done properly in a fortnight – great

indeed the Department for Education has already had a consultation done and dusted in two weeks.

And we are going further, saying: if there is no need for a consultation, then don't have one.

The next hurdle is excessive European legislation.

It holds us back. It clogs things up.

So we are fighting back hard.

We're having EU accounting rules reduced and micro-enterprises exempted.

Last month I worked with Angela Merkel to stop a new torrent of rules and regulations reaching the in-tray.

So now - for the very first time in Brussels – we have a commitment to look at existing regulations as well as new ones coming in.

This is about finally getting that ratchet of European legislation to start going in the opposite direction

and every summit I go to, every meeting I have with other leaders I am making that happen.

But the problem isn't always the legislation itself, it's how we interpret it.

You get laws gold-plated with reams of pointless reports.

Take the Equality Act.

It's not a bad piece of legislation.

But in government we have taken the letter of this law and gone way beyond it, with Equality Impact Assessments for every decision we make.

Let me be very clear.

I care about making sure that government policy never marginalises or discriminates.

I care about making sure we treat people equally.

But let's have the courage to say it

caring about these things does not have to mean churning out reams of bureaucratic nonsense.

We have smart people in Whitehall who consider equalities issues while they're making the policy.

We don't need all this extra tick-box stuff.

So I can tell you today we are calling time on Equality Impact Assessments.

You no longer have to do them if these issues have been properly considered.

That way policy-makers are free to use their judgement and do the right thing to meet the equalities duty rather than wasting their own time and taxpayers' money.

Last on my list – and it overlaps with some of the above – is getting our roads and railways built more quickly.

In the 50s it took us 8 years to design and build the first 50 miles of the M1.

Today it can take that long just to widen one section of a motorway.

So we are speeding things up.

Since we came to office we haven't just announced a load of road and railways schemes

yes – we have actually got diggers on the ground

on the A23, the M62, the M4, M5 and M6.

What's more it's our ambition to cut the time it takes to upgrade our roads in half.

So we are determined to dismantle some of the procedures that have been slowing us down – and slowing you down.

But none of this will mean much unless we have a change of culture in Whitehall too.

Now let me be clear: over the past two and a half years I've worked with exceptional civil servants who are as creative and enterprising as any entrepreneur..

and they are as frustrated with a lot of this bureaucratic rubbish as I am.

But the truth is, Whitehall has become too risk-averse

too willing to say ‘no' instead of ‘yes'.

There are understandable reasons for that.

When you have lobby groups lined up to criticise every action you take

and Parliamentary Select Committees ready to jump on every bump in the road

then the rational choice is to be cautious – even over-cautious.

But for the sake of our country's progress we have got to cut through this.

I want every Department in Whitehall to be a growth department.

I've insisted that every Permanent Secretary has growth as a key objective.

And I want every Minister and every official to understand that the dangers are not just in what you do but what you don't do

that the costs of delay are felt in businesses going bust, jobs being lost, livelihoods being destroyed.

When this country was at war in the 40s, Whitehall underwent a revolution.

Normal rules were circumvented. Convention was thrown out.

As one historian put it, everything was thrown at “the overriding purpose” of beating Hitler.

Well, this country is in the economic equivalent of war today – and we need the same spirit.

We need to forget about crossing every ‘t' and dotting every ‘i'

and we need to throw everything we've got at winning in this global race.

And I'll tell you why.

Not for our country to climb the ranks on some global leader-board for the sake of it

but for the sake of our people and their aspirations.

When we talk about re-industrialising Britain, about hi-tech industry and high-value manufacturing

this is about getting decent well-paying jobs for our people; opportunities to be had, a sense that everyone can get on if they try.

This is what it's all about.

Getting Britain on the rise.

Helping our people thrive.

Building an economy that's not just worth something but worthwhile.

And we'll build it together.




Monday, 19 November 2012

Do you think the ruling elite are worried about governments?

Church likely to allow women bishops

Corruption may continue whilst party funding remains as is

British politics will remain tainted by corruption because the three main parties are refusing to reform the way they are funded, the head of Westminster's anti-sleaze watchdog has warned.
The chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life issued a final appeal to David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg to agree a £10,000 cap on individual donations to their parties to ensure donors cannot buy access to or influence politicians. He warned that another funding scandal is inevitable if no ceiling is imposed. He also called for an inquiry by his watchdog into the work of lobbying companies and into the private firms that run public services.
The chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life criticised the three main parties for not acting on its recommendations to clean up party funding. It proposed they be recompensed for a donations cap with £23m a year of taxpayers' money.
Cross-party talks on the report are deadlocked. Although Mr Clegg tried to broker a deal, the Conservatives want a £50,000 cap and Labour opposes the committee's call for trade union members to opt in to paying the political levy to Labour, rather than opting out as at present.
Sir Christopher predicted a repeat of the "cash for access" affair which forced the resignation of Peter Cruddas, the Conservative Party co-treasurer, after he was filmed offering meetings with David Cameron in return for donations of up to £250,000.
"Every time there is a story about confidence and trust, the reputation of political parties goes down another notch," he said. "It affects everyone. It damages the brand of all of them."
Sir Christopher warned: "The three main political parties committed themselves to doing something about it in their manifestos, and the Coalition Agreement did too. And yet nothing is happening. But if they are going to reclaim any public trust, then surely they have got to be proactive in dealing with difficult issues like this."
With the parties already looking towards the 2015 general election, he said: "We are running out of time. This will require legislation. If they really want to do it, they could still do it. If it were delayed a few years, it would be a shame, but still a prize to get a sensible, sustainable system."
Sir Christopher feared that, amid the next scandal, a "half-cocked" reform would be rushed in, possibly the £50,000 cap favoured by the Tories, which might then be overturned by a future Labour-led government. He warned that such "tit-for-tat" politics would bring the parties into further disrepute. Disillusionment with the mainstream parties was illustrated in last Thursday's elections for Police and Crime Commissioners, which saw 12 independents elected in 41 areas on a turnout of less than 15 per cent.
Calling on the three parties to put the national interest before their narrow self-interest, Sir Christopher said: "For the Labour Party, it involves addressing very difficult issues about its historical dependence on the trade unions. For the Conservative Party, it requires giving up the advantage it possesses because it has a greater number of wealthier donors."
Labour fears that there could be a secret deal in which the Tories support state funding for parties and the Liberal Democrats approve parliamentary boundaries which could hand the Tories an extra 20 seats at the next election. But Liberal Democrat sources dismissed such speculation, saying Mr Clegg would not change his decision to veto the new boundaries."

Sunday, 18 November 2012

Public Servants becoming political slaves

Why I can never become a teacher.

Mr O’Neill, an expert on human rights, was asked to advise on the impact redefining marriage to include same-sex couples could have on schools, churches, hospitals, foster carers and public buildings.

Among his conclusions was that schools could be within their statutory rights to dismiss staff who wilfully fail to use stories or textbooks promoting same-sex weddings.

Parents who object to gay marriage being taught to their children would also have no right to withdraw their child from lessons, he argued.

And, in theory, the fact that a school was a faith school would make no difference, he added.

One scenario he looked at was what would happen if a primary school asked a Christian teacher to use a book called King & King, a story of a prince who marries a man, and produce a play based on the tale.

Mr O’Neill concluded: “If the teacher refused to obey the otherwise lawful instructions of her employers then this would constitute grounds for her dismissal from employment.”

He said that the teacher would be unlikely to be able to use human rights law to challenge such a decision because the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg had previously been “notably unwilling” to allow employers to use religion to request changes to their conditions of employment.

Mansion tax could be introduced

Good, I hope it does.

Democracy continues to disappear

Not only is Christianity disappearing, but so is democracy.

One state. One thought. One Mind.

Half a million people waiting for at least 30 minutes on A&E trolleys

Saturday, 17 November 2012

The mercurial nature of politics

Parents spending less time with their children as they too busy

I guess we live with the consequences of what we asked for.  It is good there are those that buck the trend, and even if they remain poor in doing so.

Charity Commission does not believe Plymouth Brethren do enough public good

So much for Christian charity! Plymouth Brethren lose battle for tax relief because 'they're doing no public good'

MPs are demanding an inquiry into the Charity Commission after the watchdog banned a Christian group from charitable status on the grounds that religion is not always for ‘public benefit’.
More than 50 MPs from all the main parties have signed a Commons motion calling on the charity regulator to think again, amid fears that hundreds of religious groups could be stripped of their tax-exempt status, threatening their very existence.
They accuse the Charity Commission of ‘politically correct bias’ against faith groups after it ruled that the Preston Down Trust of the Plymouth Brethren Church – which has 16,000 members across Britain – is not entitled to charitable status because it does not do enough good works in the community.
MPs say the ruling is ‘outrageous’ because it ignored the way the group, which has enjoyed charitable status for 50 years, runs soup kitchens for the poor and hospital visits for the sick.
Tory MP Robert Halfon said: ‘There is something rotten in the Charity Commission. I cannot understand why the Brethren, good people who do so much in their communities, have been singled out.
‘I believe an inquiry is needed into the role of the Charity Commission, to consider how it came to make the decision. What has happened is unjust and is creating fear in many churches across the country.’
Garth Christie, an elder in the Plymouth Brethren, described the decision as ‘a bolt from the blue’.
He said that he and the other members had spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on trying to prove their charitable status, and they would appeal all the way to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg if necessary.
The group has already appealed to the Charity Tribunal in what is seen as a test case that could threaten the charitable status of hundreds of small religious groups.
Several MPs are threatening to table amendments to the Small Charitable Donations Bill before Parliament later this month in a bid to protect faith groups.
The church that keeps itself in an evil world
That would seek to overturn measures in the 2006 Charities Act which removed the presumption for charities that education, religion, or poverty relief are for the public benefit.
In a ruling that sent shockwaves through even the established church, the Charity Commission ruled that its decision ‘makes it clear that there was no presumption that religion generally, or at any more specific level, is for the public benefit, even in the case of Christianity or the Church of England’.
The commission’s decision will have a huge impact on the Brethren’s tax relief.
Some 53 MPs have signed a motion which ‘calls on the Government and all parliamentarians to express their belief to the Charities Commission that Christian groups who are serving the community have the right to charitable status and should not be subject to politically correct bias’.
The motion has been signed by Tory, Labour and Lib Dem MPs, the Scottish nationalists and MPs from the DUP, SDLP and Alliance Party from Northern Ireland.
MPs say the Plymouth Brethren have been discriminated against because they are a highly private group who prefer not to talk publicly about their good works. The MPs spoke out after Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, said he was ‘very concerned’ about the warning to Christian groups and called for a ‘strong fight’ to resist the secular drift of rulings from the Charity Commission.
A commission spokesman said: ‘We received an application for registration from the Preston Down Trust, a Brethren meeting hall.
‘The application from the Trust could not be accepted based on the information we received at the time, as we were unable to conclude that the organisation is established for the advancement of religion for public benefit within the relevant charity law.
‘We can’t speculate further about this matter while it is subject to an appeal

How people fear for themselves and are classified as racist.

Read many of the comments at the end of the article too.

Britains are the most overweight in Europe

Cameron calls for curbs on internet porn to protect children

This is good. Thank you. I hope it is implemented.

Friday, 16 November 2012

How being PC means we lose sight of truth

Nearly 75% of Smartphones are Google Android

British Gas puts prices up by 6%

Christian wins his case against employer for being demoted

Thank you Lord Jesus.

Christian demoted for posting his opposition to gay marriage on Facebook wins breach of contract action

The state is ultimately your children's parent

The State wants to become harsher and harsher about determining whether vulnerable children should remain looked after by their parents.

Labour wins Corby by election from Conservatives

5G on its way in the future!

Comet administrators to close 40 stores, 1,000 jobs under threat

One rule for plebs and another for ruling elites

Minister in cash row keeps £27,000 profit from sale of second home

A Treasury minister who said it was “morally wrong” to pay tradesmen cash-in-hand is keeping thousands of pounds from the sale of his taxpayer-funded second home.

Customers to be given right to request personal information from companies

Energy companies, banks, supermarkets, mobile phone companies will be required to inform people what information is held on them.

This clearly shows you that there is a problem in our society.

???? Enquiry into why there was a low turnout for police elections.

... I don't get this.  The government almost went out of its way to keep this pretty low profile, and then they are gonna pay a load of money to find out why few people voted. They also didn't care that turnout was low!

Let's have an enquiry into why we did so badly when we know we did very little to do good things!

No one signs up to government's energy saving loan scheme...

....because the government never told us about it!!!!!  I have not seen it in the papers or the TV or heard of it on the radio.  Mmmmm me thinks this sounds as well marketed as the police commissioner elections!

How organisations lobby government to change millions of people lives

The Association of British Insurers wants to reduce accidents and insurance claims involving young people driving by not allowing young drivers to carry passengers who are not family.

Big Brother is controlling us more and more.

I wonder whether insurance companies profits would increase if this was implemented?

£66bn bank bailout may never be recouped

Global and large corporations, and the powerful and the rich really do have us plebs by the short and curlies don't they!

I thought we were meant to be embracing equality?  What is equality? It is something which we are duped into employing which keeps those in power. IE it is limited insofar as power is maintained to keep anarchy at bay.

"Banks are too big to fail, the vulnerable are too small to survive"

What you hear on the radio is a projection of an accepted world view from the individual's perspective

unless you are caught off guard.

Unknown to himself that he was live on air the Rabbi said about the Gaza Israel conflict "I think it has got to do with Iran, actually.”

As soon as he knew he was live on air "
Lord Sacks then swiftly adopted a more formal broadcasting manner and suggested the crisis demanded “a continued prayer for peace, not only in Gaza but for the whole region”.

“No-one gains from violence. Not the Palestinians, not the Israelis. This is an issue here where we must all pray for peace and work for it,” he said. "

"People tell you what you want to hear".

I know I do it a lot.

Censorship begins by those in power

Facebook, as a private corporation can do this.

Facebook is now having to think more like a publisher in the public realm.

The thin edge of the wedge is getting thicker.

How corporations can make MORE money when prices fall!

Are the government really all that interested in democracy?

Now it is the illusion of democracy that matters.

" the Electoral Commission ordered a thorough inquiry into the £75m washout, saying that the low turnout was "a concern for everyone who cares for democracy". Its chair, Jenny Watson, said the elections had been staged at an unfamiliar time of year and ministers had made decisions that the commission had disagreed with."

"Cameron insisted that despite the dismal turnout the new commissioners, who replaced "invisible police authorities", would still have a mandate."

"The Home Office only launched their website showcasing the candidates – – three weeks before the elections."

"Furthermore, the Government decided not to fund a free mail shot for candidates, which has meant that many voters have gone to the polls (or not) without receiving any information about who to vote for. It is not surprising that turnout is likely to be low."

"Police Minister Damian Green said it would have been "better" if more people voted, but added: "The measure of this policy is not the turnout, it's what the police and crime commissioners achieve over the next few years.""

IE - they are no longer interested in democracy. What they are now interested in is implementing a single person to be a commissioner for police services.  But is not about democracy.  It must be that they just did not like Police Authority, so they replaced it with a single person commissioning services.  They could always have chosen to elected the Police Authority.  But they did not.

So in time the real agenda for having a Police Commissioner will come through.

Let's wait and see.

Now we know that democracy or the legitimacy of people in office does not matter.

What matters is the results.

Well if that's the case we can measure this government by their results, whether or not they are legitimately there. 

We are travelling down a very dangerous road.

Democracy is dying. Those that want power sense the direction of the people and go with that sense. If they want democracy, they get democracy; if they want something else, they get something else.  Now that we have become apathetic to them, they no longer need to think about democracy.

No wonder the power of Christ is beyond this : even in our apathy as Christians , the Holy Spirit NEVER stops the work within us. I am so thankful for such power.

"True [worldly] power rests in wanting to and knowing how to get into power"

Welcome to the world of Machiavelli.