All passages taken from Wikipedia
He voted for the 2003 invasion of Iraq....He supported the idea of the American Surge and believes that it has been successful.
He has been an outspoken supporter of the war in Afghanistan
He has spoken on a number of occasions regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions and believes that all options, including the use of military force, have to be on the table.
Fox is a strong supporter of Israel and is a member of Conservative Friends of Israel. In 2006 he said, "Israel’s enemies are our enemies and this is a battle in which we all stand together or we will all fall divided." In January 2009, referring to Israel, he also said, “British support for any ally is never unqualified. International law and values must always be obeyed.’”
Here is a list of 223 U.N. resolutions ignored by our Israeli buddies with British and American support
Fox believes that Britain should maintain its continuous at sea, independent, submarine based strategic nuclear deterrent based on the Trident missile system.
Fox has pledged to restructure the defence procurement process in the Ministry of Defence. He has also stated that it would be a matter of policy to see Britain’s share of global defence exports increasing under a Conservative Government.
Goes nicely with this one...
Fox accepted a £50,000 donation from Jon Moulton, whose investment firm, Better Capital, later went on to own Gardner Aerospace, an aerospace metallic manufactured details supplier which includes component parts for both military and civilian aircraft.
And on expenses...
In March 2010 Fox appealed Sir Thomas Legg's decision that he had over claimed £22,476 in mortgage interest payments. Fox immediately repaid the money, then appealed the decision. Fox's appeal was rejected and the decision was upheld by Sir Paul Kennedy, a former high court judge......This reportedly made him the Conservative Shadow Cabinet member with the largest over-claim on expenses, and as a result, he has been forced to repay the most money.
It was reported in June 2009 that Fox claimed expenses of more than £19,000 over the last four years for his mobile phone
Sunday, 16 May 2010
Spotlight on George Osbourne, Chancellor of the Exchequer
Decided to check out our new cabinet. Starting with Osbourne, here's a few highlights straight from wikipedia
The Financial Times describes Osborne as "metropolitan and socially liberal. He is hawkish on foreign policy with links to Washington neo-conservatives and ideologically committed to cutting the state. A pragmatic Eurosceptic".
Requires a definition of neo-conservatives. Here's one: John McGowan, professor of humanities at the University of North Carolina, states, after an extensive review of neoconservative literature and theory, that neoconservatives are attempting to build an American Empire, seen as successor to the British Empire, its aim being to perpetuate a Pax Americana
"Osborne's wealth is estimated at £4.3m. He is also reported to be next in line to inherit a substantial share of Osborne & Little, his father's luxury wall paper company, which is thought to be worth over £1 billion"
Goes nicely with this one...
"[commited] to various tax cuts such as inheritance tax and national insurance, (which 100 economists recently said would be dangerous for the recovery). "
but inheritance tax cuts are of course for the good of the nation....
It's worth reading the whole section on his expenses claims...this is the man charged with spending taxpayer's money after all:
In 2009 he received criticism for the way he had handled his expenses, after he was found to have "flipped" his second home, changing which property he designated as his second home in order to pay less capital gains tax. The Lib Dems estimated he owed £55,000 to the public purse as a result of this. He had previously paid back £1,193 on overpayments on his mortgage and chauffeur fares and it also emerged that he had claimed £47 for two copies of a DVD of his own speech on "value for taxpayers' money".Osborne is currently being investigated by the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner over mortgage payments from 2003, and second home designation between 2001 and 2003.
The Financial Times describes Osborne as "metropolitan and socially liberal. He is hawkish on foreign policy with links to Washington neo-conservatives and ideologically committed to cutting the state. A pragmatic Eurosceptic".
Requires a definition of neo-conservatives. Here's one: John McGowan, professor of humanities at the University of North Carolina, states, after an extensive review of neoconservative literature and theory, that neoconservatives are attempting to build an American Empire, seen as successor to the British Empire, its aim being to perpetuate a Pax Americana
"Osborne's wealth is estimated at £4.3m. He is also reported to be next in line to inherit a substantial share of Osborne & Little, his father's luxury wall paper company, which is thought to be worth over £1 billion"
Goes nicely with this one...
"[commited] to various tax cuts such as inheritance tax and national insurance, (which 100 economists recently said would be dangerous for the recovery). "
but inheritance tax cuts are of course for the good of the nation....
It's worth reading the whole section on his expenses claims...this is the man charged with spending taxpayer's money after all:
In 2009 he received criticism for the way he had handled his expenses, after he was found to have "flipped" his second home, changing which property he designated as his second home in order to pay less capital gains tax. The Lib Dems estimated he owed £55,000 to the public purse as a result of this. He had previously paid back £1,193 on overpayments on his mortgage and chauffeur fares and it also emerged that he had claimed £47 for two copies of a DVD of his own speech on "value for taxpayers' money".Osborne is currently being investigated by the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner over mortgage payments from 2003, and second home designation between 2001 and 2003.
Saturday, 8 May 2010
The 13 year broken promise
Lots of talk about electoral reform at the moment, so I've been having a look at the alternatives.
However, seems the electoral reform on the first-past-the-post system is nothing new. In 1997 the Labour manifesto stated
"We are committed to a referendum on the voting system for the House of Commons. An independent commission on voting systems will be appointed early to recommend a proportional alternative to the first-past-the-post system." 1
The British public voted in favour of this manifesto, and labour retained power. In an attempt to fulfill this promise, the labour party set up the Jenkins' commission to review the electoral system in the UK. 2
The report states "The Commission's central recommendation is that the best alternative for Britain to the existing First Past The Post system is a two-vote mixed system which can be described as either limited AMS or AV Top-up" 3
The commission developed the AV+ voting system for the UK, a hybrid solution involving a constituency based vote for approx 500 members of parliament and an additional 'top-up' group of MPs selected from party lists in order to 'top up' the commons to improve proportional representation at the national level (see 4 for a better explanation of AV+).
Since the Jenkins' report was published in 1998 we have had a recommendation for a voting system that provides a suitable compromise between proportional representation and constituency-linked parliament members. For 12 years we have had an elected promise of a referendum to vote on this recommendation. Still waiting...
1. http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labour-manifesto.shtml
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenkins_Commission_(UK)
3. http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/chap-9.htm
4. http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=56
However, seems the electoral reform on the first-past-the-post system is nothing new. In 1997 the Labour manifesto stated
"We are committed to a referendum on the voting system for the House of Commons. An independent commission on voting systems will be appointed early to recommend a proportional alternative to the first-past-the-post system." 1
The British public voted in favour of this manifesto, and labour retained power. In an attempt to fulfill this promise, the labour party set up the Jenkins' commission to review the electoral system in the UK. 2
The report states "The Commission's central recommendation is that the best alternative for Britain to the existing First Past The Post system is a two-vote mixed system which can be described as either limited AMS or AV Top-up" 3
The commission developed the AV+ voting system for the UK, a hybrid solution involving a constituency based vote for approx 500 members of parliament and an additional 'top-up' group of MPs selected from party lists in order to 'top up' the commons to improve proportional representation at the national level (see 4 for a better explanation of AV+).
Since the Jenkins' report was published in 1998 we have had a recommendation for a voting system that provides a suitable compromise between proportional representation and constituency-linked parliament members. For 12 years we have had an elected promise of a referendum to vote on this recommendation. Still waiting...
1. http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labour-manifesto.shtml
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenkins_Commission_(UK)
3. http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/chap-9.htm
4. http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=56
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
