Wednesday, 29 February 2012

Robin Tilbrook on Daily Politics

Here is a screenshot from today's Daily Politics programme featuring our chairman Robin Tilbrook.

I thought this was a really good bit of publicity for us.

Today's show can be viewed on the BBC's iPlayer here.

Robin's appearances commences at 1 hr 16:31 minutes.

Tuesday, 28 February 2012

UK Taxpayers Fund Argentina

Here is my latest article from the English Democrats website...

Pictured: Falklands Liberation Memorial (designed by a local Falkland Islander), Stanley, Falklands.

The contempt displayed by the UK government towards English taxpayers was brought home in the starkest of terms earlier this week when it was revealed that the UK has contributed towards an aid fund of £452 million for Argentina.

This outrage comes in the wake of threats made by the South American country against the people of the Falkland Islands. Two hundred and fifty-five British service personnel and three Islanders lost their lives in the Falklands War of 1982, but despite the decisive victory attained by our brave troops, Argentina has never renounced its claim to the islands.

The past few weeks and months have seen increased signs of sabre-rattling by the Argentinean government, which is well aware of the weakening of our armed forces that has been carried out by successive Tory and Labour administrations since the conflict of three decades ago. Argentina will no doubt expect that a renewed invasion of the islands would be more successful than their last attempt.

In addition to this, last year the Taxpayers' Alliance highlighted the outrageous situation whereby our taxes are being used to provide aid to a number of other South American countries which support Argentina's claims to the islands.

It has been clear that the UK government's foreign aid policies are not fit for purpose and represent the most egregious misuse of taxpayers' money. The textbook case to demonstrate this is surely that of the UK's aid to India. India has its own space programme and foreign aid budget and is dogged by a staggering culture of corruption and institutional incompetence.

India's finance minister Pranab Mukherjee, along with other ministers, has revealed that India sought last year to halt aid from the UK, which it described as "peanuts", but backed down following protestations by the UK government .

At a time when our people are struggling to make ends meet and the economy languishes in a protracted depression, it is a damning indictment of the UK government that our taxes are being wasted on foreign aid projects in countries that do not even want our money.

The fact that the list of UK aid recipients includes a country which is becoming ever more aggressive towards our people on the Falkland Islands is perhaps the greatest insult of all, not just to our taxpayers, but to those brave soldiers of ours who laid down their lives in order to ensure the Falkland Islanders' freedom almost thirty years ago.


See also:

Palace Barracks Memorial Garden

Monday, 27 February 2012

What goes around comes around

Earlier this week my colleague Eddy Butler published a story regarding the singer Adele (whose whiney songs I cannot stand if I am honest but each to their own!) and some smear or other that had been printed about her in the gutter press somewhere.

The underlying point of the article was to highlight the fact that smears in the mainstream media will be believed by a significant proportion of the public who become aware of them.

This is in stark contrast to smears that appear on anonymous blogs and internet forums, which receive a miniscule readership and are not taken seriously by intelligent people.

Reading between the lines of Eddy's aricle, it was clear that he was hinting that something must be on the way in the form of unfavourable media coverage
of Nick Griffin's BNP; Britain's fastest shrinking political party.

The story duly arrived yesterday in the Daily Star (EX-MODEL SAYS BNP LEADER NICK GRIFFIN EXPOSED HIMSELF). A similar story also appeared in the Daily Mail (BNP leader Nick Griffin 'is a sex pest who exposed himself to former glamour model in her car'.)

I received a barrage of hate-filled messages from assorted Griffinites after I had posted links to these articles, which shows just how much such smears
hurt the Griffin regime, despite their protestations to the contrary.

This inspired me to write this aricle, as if it caused the attack dogs of Nick Griffin so much distress then this episode is surely worth dwelling on for a bit longer.

I guess for me there are two main lessons to be learned from this;

1) Internet smears mean nothing. Anyone can set up an anonymous blog or join a forum under a pseudonym and they can say whatever they like about you. Reading such things can be upsetting and enfuriating but the point to remember is that they are completely meaningless. There is not much difference between a lie which exists purely in the sick mind of your opponent or one which he has posted on his anonymous blog. Stay away from such sites and pay no attention to them whatsoever. If the only way your enemies can smear you is on anonymous internet sites then it means they have nothing on you at all and they cannot touch you.

The only way their smears can have the desired effect is if they are lucky enough to be smearing a hyper-sensitive soul who reads everything written about them by their enemies on the internet and then seeks to address each and every smear - often on the forum on which it appeared, which will invariably be controlled by a hostile entity. This only encourages the keyboard warriors behind the hate campaign and makes their vile campaign of harrassment worthwhile.

Until a smear is picked up on by the press, who will not generall run stories based purely on internet smears, for all intents and purposes it doesn't exist. Only when it hits the press should responses be published.

2) In politics, as in life in general, you should treat other people as you would wish them to treat you.

Surely we were all taught this when we were young?

The stories in yesterday's newspapers came about as a result of someone falling out with Nick Griffin who had until very recently been used by him to spread the most disgusting smears about his political opponents (including me). When you behave as reprehensibly as Nick Griffin does, when you dedicate so much time and effort to attacking other nationalists (and Nick Griffin has never focussed a fraction of the energy he spends attacking nationalists on the enemies of nationalism), and when you use others to spread your filth, you build up so much ill will and resentment against you that people will end up queuing up to get their payback, however they possibly can.

The fact that the stories in question came about due to the defection of a recent attack dog merely adds a beautifully ironic slant to this tale.

The Griffinites and his apologists who have contacted me bleating about the Star article and claiming it is all just a result of sour grapes seem to be missing this important point, and it is one that I have tried to point out to them:

If you spend your time attacking good nationalists and setting up nasty blogs to smear them with your deranged poison do not be suprised when this results in a backlash against you. Treat others as you would want them to treat you.

If you are truly a nationalist, spend your time doing something positive for the Cause rather than attacking others. And if you cannot do that, do not come whimpering when your behaviour comes back to bite you.

Thursday, 23 February 2012

PC indoctrination is child abuse

Here is my latest article from the English Democrats website...

The shocking revelation that a seven year old boy from Hull was branded a 'racist' by his school for asking a fellow pupil a question demonstrates the politically correct depths to which the Lib-Lab-Con parties have plunged our country.

To recap, for those of you who managed to avoid news of this sorry tale: A seven year boy asked a fellow pupil at Griffin Primary School (pictured) in Hull if he was 'brown because he's from Africa'. Following this, the boy's mother was called into the school by staff and asked to sign a form acknowledging that her son had made a racist remark.

She is quotes as saying "I was told I would have to sign a form acknowledging my son had made a racist remark which would be submitted to the local education authority for further investigation.

'I refused to sign it and I told the teacher in no way did I agree the comment was racist. My son is inquisitive. He always likes to ask questions, but that doesn't make him a racist.'

The mother of the boy who was asked the question has made it clear that she was not behind this vile witch hunt, and has stated that "I don't want people going round saying I called that little boy racist. This is extremely distressing for me and my family." This makes it clear that the initiative for this incident came from within the school.

Anyone with children will know that they are naturally inquisitive and innocent. These twin traits can lead them to ask questions which may occasionally make their parents blush. In such situations, a good parent will seek to answer the question in a way which both provides a satisfactory explanation and, the parent in question will hope, will prevent the need for the same awkward question to arise again.

This should not be taken for one second to suggest that the question asked in this case should be an embarrassing one, but the fact is that decades of politically correct subversion by treacherous politicians from the Lib-Lab-Con cartel parties have ensured that the subject of race is taboo and there is an ever-present risk that even innocuous remarks can be interpreted as 'racist' and used against the statement maker.

Most adults in our society today have been sufficiently indoctrinated to be able to take steps, often unconsciously, to avoid putting themselves in a situation where they may enter the 'PC danger zone' and say something which could result in them being branded a 'racist', but young children have not yet generally been so conditioned, despite the worst intentions of the staff at Griffin Primary School and their ilk.

There are many ways that this question could have been answered, ranging from the politically correct through to the honest and commonsense. The fact that the staff at the school felt it appropriate to drag the boy's poor mother into school and attempt to force her to sign a form condemning her son for an alleged thought-crime is a damning indictment indeed of these so-called teachers. Those responsible should hang their heads in shame and be thrown out of the school and banned from ever working with children again. Politically correct indoctrination is a form of child abuse and those who practice it should be treated accordingly.

In a sane and healthy society our children would be encouraged to ask questions and no subject would be taboo. This is the approach which all good parents already take of course. Occasionally this may lead to awkward questions being asked, but these can be easily answered.

It is a sobering thought that more than 20,000 children under the age of 11 were put on record by their teachers (and one can only use this term in its loosest sense in this context) in 2010 for the kind of 'hate-crimes' as the one allegedly committed by the young boy in Hull when he asked an innocent question.

Little wonder then, that our school system is failing our children so badly, when politically correct indoctrination is prioritised over real education. This sickening episode shows just how badly our country needs a party that will fight the evils of this alien ideology wherever it rears its ugly head.

That party is the English Democrats and I would urge you to join us and help us to free our people from this madness.

Friday, 17 February 2012

Cameron Takes a Trip to Scotland

Here is my latest article on the English Democrats website...

His trip to Scotland today reveals further signs that British Prime Minister David Cameron is resorting to scaremongering tactics in his bid to interfere in the independence referendum planned for 2014.

Amongst other things, his speech in Edinburgh makes reference to the armed forces;

"We're stronger, because together we count for more in the world, with a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, real clout in NATO and Europe and unique influence with allies all over the world.

"We're safer, because in an increasingly dangerous world we have the fourth-largest defence budget on the planet, superb armed forces and anti-terrorist and security capabilities that stretch across the globe and are feared by our enemies and admired by our friends."

It is understandable that Mr Cameron feels that such fear tactics may be effective as the issue of defence is clearly an emotive one and nobody would want their vote to result in their country being left vulnerable to foreign foes.

The flip side of this of course is that were Scottish armed forces to be controlled separately from those controlled by Westminster then presumable this would allow them to avoid participation in costly foreign wars against regimes with non-existent weapons of mass destruction, for example.

An independent Scotland would presumably also have control of its own borders and the ability to opt out of the benefits of mass third world immigration, including from countries containing people who reject modern Western values, which, particularly when coupled with an underlying grievance against the West much exacerbated by the aforementioned types of military adventures, can have terrible consequences for the recipient country.

Under such circumstances, it could reasonably be argued that Scotland would be far safer from the threats of international terrorism than is currently the case.

It is always rather cringe-inducing to see politicians from the Lib-Lab-Con cartel parties become motivated by supposedly patriotic fervour. After all, who could ever forget Gordon Brown's infamous 'British jobs for British Workers' quip? David Cameron's latest attempts to play the patriot card in his struggle to prevent Scottish independence (and, importantly, the inevitable boost that this would give to the English nationalist cause) are likely to be viewed north of the border as little more than patronising meddling by a politician with no mandate in Scotland and nothing productive to add to the debate on the future governance of the United Kingdom.

See also: Scottish independence: Salmond details Scottish Defence Force plan

Tuesday, 14 February 2012

Some thoughts on Scotland

Pictured: Edinburgh Castle

Last week I had the pleasure of travelling to Edinburgh for my work. The trip 'up north' inevitably got me thinking about our comrades in Scotland and the relationship between the different countries of the British Isles.

Detractors of the English Democrats, and in particular those in unionist parties who seek to denigrate those of us who put our hearts and souls into the English nationalist struggle, continue to try and claim that by focussing all our efforts on England that this demonstrates that we have somehow become anti-Scottish in our outlook.

Whilst it should be clear to all but the most blinkered that this is not the case, I do not take anything for granted and I think that it is worth stating in very simple terms right here and now just what my own views are on our relations with Scotland.

The first things to consider are the basic facts of the United Kingdom's current administrational arrangements. Within the United Kingdom there are four countries - Ulster, Scotland, Wales, and England. The first three have their own parliament or assembly, in addition to sending representatives to Westminster. England does not have its own parliament and this disadvantages the people of England in a variety of ways.

Ignoring or even welcoming this clearly unjust situation compounds this injustice. It is not anti-Scottish to point this out.

The English Democrats do not call for independence for England from the rest of the United Kingdom (though we would not stop the people of any of its constituent countries from voting for their own independence), we simply wish for England to have fair elected representation.

This may seem counter-intuitive to some, but correcting the democratic deficit expressed in the West Lothian Question through the creation of a parliament for England could well strengthen the United Kingdom as a whole by alleviating a major point of English contention and putting relations between the nations of Britain on a more sensible and equitable footing for the 21st Century.

It is interesting to note that my Scottish friends are fully supporting of me in my work for the English Democrats. They realise that being pro-English does not equate to being anti-Scottish.

You will no more witness me displaying anti-Scottishness than you will hear me being anti-German or anti-French. Small-minded xenophobia is for the gutter tabloids and those of the hard of thinking, not for nationalists, who welcome and celebrate the many differences, some minor, some more pronounced, between the peoples of Europe and the wider world.

Nationalists welcome the fact that humanity has developed from its common origins to become a diverse patchwork of tribes and nations, each with its own idiosyncrasies and affectations.

Celebrating and promoting one's own unique culture does not imply disrespect towards others.

My trip to Edinburgh gave me the chance to meet up with a number of Scottish comrades who I had not seen for a few years. It was a good opportunity to renew friendships and discuss the ongoing struggle of our people against the forces of unreason.

I hope you will forgive me for stating the obvious, for that is surely what the above text constitutes, but sometimes it is worth taking a step back and putting into very simply terms just what one's thoughts are.

To end of a very practical point, it should be remembered that the struggle for Britain will be won or lost in England. It is in England that the vast majority of our islands' population lives, and, crucially, it is England which bears the brunt of mass immigration.

Attention spent trying to hold back the rising tide of Englishness out of some misplaced sense of nostalgia for the imagery of an age which has passed is an intellectual indulgence which our children and grandchildren can ill afford.

Sunday, 12 February 2012

BNP attack-dog turns on owner

Whenever Nick Griffin falls out with his henchmen this provides a source of amusement to myself and all the many other good nationalists who are enjoying the spectacle of the drawn out death of his rotten regime.

I would not normally have cause to blog about individual examples of this but a detailed article written by Claudia Dalgleish, a former BNP attack dog, which has been published on Eddy Butler's blog, is of great relevance to the English Democrats and should by read by as many of our organisers and activists as possible.

I single this out as an important article as in it we have a frank admission that Nick Griffin is obsessed with the English Democrats and will use his thugs and internet warriors to attempt to derail the progress we continue to make.

The vindictiveness and spite of Nick Griffin and his ilk should not be underestimated.

In the article, the former attack dog states;

The main target that Nick Griffin wanted me to attack was inevitably Eddy Butler.

I was tasked to create division and dissent in the ranks of the English Democrats in an attempt to prevent Eddy Butler from joining them.

Obviously the attempts to prevent Eddy Butler from joining our party failed miserably, but the fact that this was one of the main aims of someone who was then one of Nick Griffin's leading agitators demonstrates that we as a party must always be on our guard for such attempts at subversion.

No doubt other sincere patriots will continue to join the English Democrats from other parties, including the BNP. See here for a recent example of this phenomenon. Inevitably, when this happens, the remaining thugs and degenerates that still pledge their allegiance to their mad king Nick will seek to attack those patriots and attempt to deprive the English Democrats of the activism and expertise that they could bring to our party.

Clearly such attempts should be treated with the contempt that they deserve.

Later in the article we learn that Nick Griffin tasked the attack dog with obtaining an English Democrats membership list from "a naive member of that party". Apparently these attempts were also unsuccessful.

All in all this damning expose of the inner-workings of Nick Griffin's dwindling band of supporters should serve as a warning to all English Democrats members and supporters to be on guard against attempts by such reprehensible individuals to smear new or prospective English Democrats members.

Claudia has apologised to myself and others for her past behaviour, which is more than has been done by some of the BNPs' other former attack dogs who have since become Nick Griffin's most vocal opponents.

I am not one to hold a grudge and I believe that in such situations the most sensible thing is to draw a line under the past and not dwell on the past activities of the person in question. Others may not be willing or able to do this, and some of the responses to the article on Eddy's site attest to this. I can symapthise with such people, but for me when an enemy ceases to be my enemy for whatever reason then that is the end of the matter. Life is just too short to behave otherwise and our Cause still has more than enough enemies out there without us going out of our way to find new ones.

There are also very sound tactical reasons for taking such an approach. The defection of this one individual has had a devastating blow to the remaining attack-rats in Nick Griffin's sinking ship. By giving Claudia Dalgleish the opportunity to make up for her past behaviour (which I am led to believe that she is doing in a number of very promising ways) this will compound the damage to Nick Griffin's regime.

Nick Griffin's supporters must realise that when the time comes and they are ready to leave, they can do so. This should not be jeopardised by our personal desire to settle scores with those who are no longer our opponents.

Read the full article here: My Time in the BNP by Claudia Dalgleish

Saturday, 11 February 2012

More excellent coverage in the Financial Times

Page two of the FT Weekend is dominated by a story entitled;

England stirs to waving of the nationalism flag.

Our chairman Robin Tilbrook is featured in the article;

Robin Tilbrook, chairman of the fringe Engliah Democrat (sic) party - which has just six councillors but won almost 280,000 votes in th European elections - believes there is a whiff of change in the air.

"National identity is a state of mind, it is a sense of community, if you go to Scotland you can feel a very strong Scottish identity. In England it is not yet as strong as Scotland or Wales - where some people only feel 'British' when talking about passports or benefits - but that sense of difference will inevitably increase."

Later in the article former English Democrats election candidate and TV critic Gary Bushell is also reported as saying that;

it is unfair that English nationalism is sometimes seen as "sinister and unhealthy" while the "liberal media" applaud patriotism elsewhere in the UK. "It's quite understandable that the English think they're getting a raw deal when you look at the present set-up with the Barnett formula. I'm not anti-Scottish, we should just have a parity of equality and our own parliament."

This article is well worth reading in its entirely and the FT Weekend should still be in the shops to buy tomorrow.

Friday, 10 February 2012

Letter to Metro Newspaper on English Parliament

The other day I found myself on a train reading the Metro newspaper. Upon skimming through the pages of this publication I happened upon a letter concerning the issue of Scottish independence.

Like any good political fanatic would, I felt an irresistible urge to reply, despite my realisation that my letter probably wouldn't get published.

In any case, using my phone I basically texted them the following response:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Jester of North Lanarkshire argues ('Don't make us angry', Metro Talk 8 February 2012) that it would be an egregious affront to democracy should the rest of the United Kingdom be allowed to wield a veto over the issue of Scottish independence were the people of Scotland to vote the 'wrong' way in the referendum planned for autumn 2014.

I agree wholeheartedly.

I must point out to Jester, however, that it would not be possible for 'England to revamp their own parliament' in the event of Scottish independence, as he suggests, for one rather significant reason ; unique among the countries of the United Kingdom, England does not have its own parliament or assembly.

This too is a thoroughly unsatisfactory and undemocratic situation which should be resolved through the creation of an English parliament which will help to correct the representational imbalances that exist within the United Kingdom.

An English parliament is needed quite irrespective of how the people of Scotland choose to vote regarding their constitutional destiny.

Chris Beverley

Update 13/2/12: Apparently this letter was printed in today's Metro.
Note to self: Don't be so cynical about the chances of my letters getting printed!

Monday, 6 February 2012

Depression and Recession

I was questioned recently on a statement I made in a recent article in which I described the country as being in a state of depression.

The lexicon of the so-called 'dismal science' of economics sometimes almost seems purposely designed to maintain impregnability by the layperson, but the basics need to be understood in order for information regarding the state of an economy to have any meaning at all.

An economic depression is generally defined as an economic downturn during which output is below its pre-crisis peak. In the fourth quarter of 2011, gross domestic product - the total amount of goods and services produced by the UK - was 3.8% lower than the pre-crisis peak of the first quarter of 2008.

These figures should form the backdrop to any discussions regarding economic recession, which in the UK is technically defined as occurring when economic output has shrunk over two successive financial quarters.

Thus, in a single year, there may be a recession as a result of the economy contracting over just six months, but if this were followed by six months of economic growth exceeding the recessionary shrinkage then this would ensure that over the year as a whole the economy would in fact have experienced some growth.

On the other hand, an economy may experience a very small amount of growth, thereby allowing the ruling politicians of the day to crow about an end to the previous recession, despite the fact that this growth is merely indicative of the economy moving very slowly back in the right direction, but still being in a far worse off state than it was before the crisis.

This latter example can be applied to the UK economy at the present time, although the fact that the economy shrunk by 0.2% in the fourth quarter of 2011 suggests that the economy may well officially be back in a recession by the end of March in any case.

I apologise if the above is merely stating the obvious but the fact that far too often politicians are allowed to boast about an end to recession, as if that signifies that everything is now just fine with the economy, suggests that it is worth reiterating exactly what the terms recession and depression actually mean.

Sunday, 5 February 2012

Yorkshire Mayoral Campaign Launch on Politics Show

We got a brief (and I stress brief) mention on today's Politics Show for Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.

We appear at 43.26 minutes through the programme which can be viewed on BBC iPlayer here.

See here for more on our campaign launch.

Thursday, 2 February 2012

Yorkshire Mayoral Referendum Campaign Launch‏

Here is my latest article from the English Democrats website.

On Tuesday night a meeting was held in Sheffield to launch the English Democrats' 'Yes' campaigns for the upcoming referendums in Leeds, Wakefield, Bradford, and Sheffield on the question of whether those cities should move to a democratically elected mayoral system.

The meeting was ably chaired by Sheffield English Democrats Chairman David Wildgoose.

David delivered an interesting speech which explored the possible consequences of the people of Scotland voting for independence from the UK in the referendum which is planned to be held north of the border in autumn 2014. A yes vote would have all manner of interesting effects on the rest of the UK, both domestically and internationally, the meeting was told. See here for an interesting article by David on this theme.

I spoke next, and detailed three important campaigns for which our party must prepare in 2012, namely; the local elections on May 3rd, the mayoral referendums which will be held on the same day, as well as the elections on 15th November to elect police commissioners.

The text of my speech can be read here.

Following a break, party Chairman Robin Tilbrook addressed the gathering. Robin explained a bit about his own background and talked about the formation of the English Democrats in 2002.

Speaking about our campaign for the introduction of democratically elected mayors, he explained;

"The Mayoral system is a better and more democratic one than the only legally permitted alternative of a councillor who is selected by other councillors, no doubt on the well worn principles of “Buggins’ turn” and “back-scratching” to be the Leader with a cabinet.

Both roles have exactly the same powers and exactly the same pay and term of office. The sole legal difference is that the Elected Mayor is chosen by the People.

So for a democrat – and we English Democrats chose our name carefully because we are about both England and also about democracy – for a Democrat the option of having an Elected Mayor is clearly the only proper one."

The full text of Robin's speech can be read here.

Facebook pages have been set up for the 'Yes' campaigns in the four Yorkshire cities in question. Please show your support by 'liking' these pages to help us spread the word and highlight the arguments of our yes campaign.


Vote YES to an elected Mayor in Leeds

Vote YES to an elected Mayor in Wakefield

Vote YES to an elected Mayor in Bradford

Vote YES to an elected Mayor in Sheffield

Wednesday, 1 February 2012

My Sheffield Speech

Here is the text of my speech from last night's excellent meeting in Sheffield with our party Chairman Robin Tilbrook.

These are exciting times to be involved in the English Democrats. However one wishes to measure such things, our party is making real progress.

I'm going to discuss three important campaigns that we have before us.

Local elections

No speech would be complete at the current time that does not remind people of the upcoming local elections on May 3rd across the whole of South and West Yorkshire.

Last May the English Democrats won our first ever seats at local council level. The victors in these seats were not the first English Democrat councillors, as we had already had a number of defections from councillors in other parties who had seen the light and joined us, but the victories last May in Boston, Lincolnshire, were an important hurdle for our party that we successfully passed and it is important that we continue our electoral progress at this level of government.

To that end we need to fight as many seats as possible in Yorkshire in the local elections in May. This is not something to start thinking about in April, when the deadline for the submission of nominations has passed, this is something we need to be thinking about now.

Having spoken to a number of organisers around Yorkshire it seems likely that we are set to stand more local election candidates that we ever have before in Yorkshire in May. But we shouldn't be complacent and we should all work hard to ensure that we stand in every last seat that we possibly can, in order to give the maximum number of our people the chance to vote for the English Democrats, England's democratic party, in the elections.

Mayoral Referendums

On the same day as the local elections, referendums will be held in the cities of Leeds, Bradford, Wakefield, and here in Sheffield, on whether these cities should change to a system of a directly elected leader - an elected mayor.

This is a very important issue for the English Democrats, and not just because this is where our biggest electoral victory has come from, in the form of Peter Davis' election as mayor of Doncaster back in 2009.

I was a councillor on Leeds City Council for four years and I have seen at first hand the kind of cronyism that results in a particular person becoming the Lord Mayor of the city. The existing system really is unfit for a civilised democracy.

But it's important to realise that the introduction of elected mayors does not constitute a mere tweaking of this existing system, forcing mayors who are currently appointed through cronyism to be elected by the electorate, though even this would be an improvement on the current system.

Elected mayors, however, bear little resemblance to today's Lord Mayors, despite sharing the title mayor.

Rather, elected mayors can be equated with leaders of council, .i.e. they have real political power. Under the current system, the electoral cannot directly elect their leader of council just as they cannot elect their mayor. The introduction of elected mayors, or leaders of council if you prefer, changes all that.

In a single election the voters of a local authority are given the opportunity to vastly improve the way their council operates. Corrupt Labour Party regimes that have parasitised our communities for decades can be democratized in a single day.

It's little wonder that the lib-lab-con cartel parties are opposed to elected mayors.

This is an issue which is rightly associated with the English Democrats, more so than any other single political party. Only last week and English Democrats campaign succeeded in gaining a yes vote in the referendum on this issue, meaning the people of Salford will be given the change to elect their council leader in May.

All across the country our activists are working hard to secure referendums on this important issue.

In the cities of Leeds, Bradford, Wakefield, and Sheffield, referendums have been set out in government legislation, so we are now at the stage of launching our campaign for a yes vote in all these cities.

We will work with other interested parties and individuals from outside the English Democrats, who wish to campaign for a yes vote, as we did in the successful campaign in Salford.

Over the coming weeks we aim to deliver thousands of leaflets to constituents outlining the arguments of the yes campaign in the hope of delivering yes votes in May. We will need your help to do this, so if you can help in any way, whether it is coming out and leafleting, speaking to people in the street, or donating money to help fund our campaign, please identify yourselves to us.

Your support is very much appreciated.

Police Commissioners

The third campaign that I would like to touch on briefly concerns the elections in November to elect police commissioners - one for every police force in the country outside London.

This means there will be four such elections in Yorkshire for each of the four police forces here.

The planned introduction of elected police commissioners has been criticised by some, who claim that it will politicise the police.

Well let's just take a step back and think about that. It is claimed that introducing elected police commissioners will lead to a politicisation of the police. This implies that the police are not already politicised. Is this so?

Let me counter their argument by saying that our nation's police forces have been undermined for decades by the forces of political correctness deliberately inflicted upon them by successive Labour and Tory governments. In the English Democrats we are straight-taking Englishmen and women and we do not hesitate to label political correctness the evil that it undoubtedly is - we make this clear in our manifesto - and the effects that political correctness has had throughout our society, including in our police forces, are plain to see on a daily basis.

A graphic example was seen last summer, where criminal mobs were allowed to riot and loot with relative impunity. This is what happens when our police forces become weakened by political correctness. Lest it be claimed that such situations are beyond the power of our police forces to deal with, anyone who has ever been to a football match will know that the police are more than capable of controlling crowds when their orders are to do so.

Our police have become institutionally politically correct, and this has had an extremely debilitating effect on their operational efficiency.

The first thing that an elected English Democrats Police Commissioner will take steps to cut out the cancer of political correctness in their police force in order to free up our police to do their jobs without constantly having to carry out Orwellian double-thinking to please their politically correct bosses.

English Democrats police commissioners will remove the unacceptable burdens of PC, from our PC's, to coin a phrase.

In this way, the introduction of elected police commissioners could paradoxically herald a de-politicisation of our police, rather than their politicisation.

It is very important that we give the people of Yorkshire the choice of electing credible English Democrat candidates to these important positions of authority, and that is why we need to start identifying suitable candidates now for the four police authorities of Yorkshire.

The elections for this position will take place on 15th November 2012, and elections for mayors in any of the 4 Yorkshire cities holding referendums will also be held on the same day.

This means that 15th November will be a hugely important day for us, a super Thursday of elections, for which serious preparation is required.
We have shown we can get an English Democrats mayor elected.

Imagine how the political landscape will shift if we get more elected in December along with a police commissioner or two.

Clearly the sky is the limit for our party, and it is a privilege to be involved in the English Democrats at such a time. I would urge you all to redouble your efforts for our party to ensure that 2012 is our best year yet!

A full report of this meeting will be published on shortly.