Independent Sovereign Democratic Britain

Happily, we will now get an Independent Sovereign Democratic Britain, delivered by Brexit.

British sovereignty should no longer be shared and we should be represented abroad by only the British Government; the Sovereign-in-Parliament should be the final arbiter over British Subjects; and we should be Democratic not Bureaucratic.

I stood fast for this—I even had to leave Cameron’s Conservatives—but now the Referendum has delivered our British Will on this, even though the Liberal Democrats do not understand that. I want to be in Parliament to see that this is delivered.

I want to see stronger Defence—it has been cut too far; by definition,  no crystal ball can forecast when we may face an unforeseen danger.

I also want to see better use of the Armed Services abroad, used together with a Civilian Overseas Aid Service, to deliver Foreign Aid in kind on scene (no money handed over); and to be ready to help when Humanitarian and Natural Disasters occur. We need some change in Force structures and some new ships—Logistics, Humanitarian and Military Command and Support ships.  We should consider National Citizenship Service to augment Defence and Humanitarian Aid capabilities.

A Strategic Defence Review should look again at Force roles across the Globe, at Home Based Quick Reaction Mobile Regular Forces and at establishing Commonwealth Naval Task Groups, not least to share meeting Disaster Relief scenarios.

Security, Intelligence and Surveillance must be fully funded.

UK Border Controls and Immigration, post Brexit, should be wholly subject to the sovereign will of Parliament which alone should set and alter these laws and rules as required from time to time. 

Parliament should establish new criteria for British Citizenship, Immigration and Visa entry policies. 

I consider that we should avoid setting Migration level targets—the numbers are always arbitrary—but rely instead on sensible and balanced criteria.

For example, except for security reasons, tourists and visitors should be able to enter with minimal fuss, albeit with an insistence on the visitor being self sufficient and holding health cover insurance for the duration of the agreed length of stay.  Work Visas should be issued when jobs have been secured and health cover insurance provided by the visitor or employer. The employer might need to show that local recruitment was impractical.  A variety of visas would be needed -to cover students, for example.

Refugees should always be given exactly that— safe refuge—where there is a genuine need and usually where a proper approach has been made to the first British Authority with whom the refugee can make contact.  Refugees should be brought to Britain under proper control and suitably accommodated; their aim should be to return home when safe; otherwise, after a period set by Parliament, they should apply for citizenship and full residential status.

As I would like to introduce National Citizenship Service after the age of 18, I would like so see  all applicants for citizenship having to undertake such service, and to pass an English test.

Our Commonwealth Links have sadly diminished since we joined the EC/EU and we must revitalise those relationships in terms of free trade, cultural exchange and strengthen Defence co-operation. I’d propose a Commonwealth Free Trade Agreement.

Small Business: I have a solution to Late Payment Problem: HMRC should penalise late payers, via VAT returns. And I think the Business Rates system across the UK must be radically simplified to be based only on premises size (square footage), regardless of  site location or use, etc, in two bands: one for PLCs and a capped lower rate for SMEs.

National Lottery Ticket’s should include five option boxes so we can direct what benefits:  Research, NHS, Defence, Art & Culture and Community.

 Farming and Fishing should continue to receive, directly from the British Government, the subsidies currently received via Brussels.  Parliament should then, consulting with those industries, change  policies so that both CFP and the CAP fits our circumstances.

Universities  need a guarantee that there will be no non-security restrictions on visas for foreign staff or students.  Attracting foreign investment should be encouraged.

The NHS is vital but a thorough review is needed to get the available money more directly to the point of need.

Food and Fuel Poverty is best combatted by a good economy but we should immediately defy EU restraints and stop VAT on domestic energy.

Space Exploration:  Create a tax free unsubsidized regime to build the British Space Industry.

No more Onshore Wind Turbines unless directly owned, unsubsidized and run by local communities themselves.

Housing needs should be supported with any available public monies primarily being injected to support start up private home ownership.

Fracking

Displace coal and reduce carbon footprint?

https://dub119.mail.live.com/default.aspx#n=992449898&fid=91418cbd74114e1a90fbc774edd49815&mid=95c6f075-e026-11e2-a559-00237de4a7e6&fv=1

Does your councillor or MSP care?

What do you think?

http://joshrjones.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/white-throated-needletail.html

There is no sanity in the SNP or Coalition Governement wind energy policies.  If you voted for one of them - think again.

FORMER LIBERAL DEMOCRAT TO BE UKIPSCOTLAND ENERGY SPOKESMAN

RENEWABLE ENERGY EXPERT AND FORMER LIBERAL DEMOCRAT TO BE UKIPSCOTLAND ENERGY SPOKESMAN

Michael Haseler, a renowned renewable energy sector researcher and leading commentator on the futility of wind power, is to be UKIP Scotland’s Energy Spokesman.

Announcing the appointment, UKIPScotland Chairman, Mike Scott-Hayward said “Mike Haseler is a well known and respected commentator on energy matters and is a core contributor to the Climate Change debate.

“His brief for UKIPScotland will be to cover all Energy issues affecting Scotland – energy security which requires nuclear power and cannot rely on wind; the realities of the adverse impacts of EU directives and consequent distorting subsidies which leads both to desecration of our landscape and to increasing fuel poverty; and achieving the best balanced and efficient use of resources.”

Australian born Mike’s family moved back to Britain and settled in Cheltenham where he attended the local Grammar School. He went to University in St Andrews and took a degree in Physics & Electronic with a module in Philosophy. He then joined Timex where he worked in Research, Development & Test on the Sinclair Flat Screen and Sinclair Spectrum.

He took an MBA at Strathclyde and then worked in a textile Mill as a quality and engineering manager.

After marrying he moved to Watford with his wife where he stood for the council as a Liberal Democrat.

Following the birth of their first child, Mike and his wife moved back to Scotland where he worked as a systems analyst.

Mr Haseler joined the Scottish Parliamentary Renewable Energy Group. As part of a SMART award, he carried out research into the renewable energy sector and became concerned at the lack of economic benefit from existing policy. He started campaigning to secure more jobs from wind energy and that led to him joining the Green party who chose him to stand at the 2003 Scottish election.

His career led him to start producing and installing weather monitoring equipment for wind farm site assessments.

Mr Scott-Hayward explained: “It was whilst doing this that he discovered the real horror of wind energy on local people and birdlife and he chose to leave the wind sector since when he has been a campaigner against wind and in favour of energy policies based on real science, not global warming alarmism. He formed the Scottish Climate and Energy Forum.

“As time progressed he came to recognise the value and sense of UKIP’s policy, and I am therefore delighted today to be able to announce that he will take the lead for us in Scotland on Energy.”

Mr Haseler, accepting the appointment, said “I have three children and I really care about the kind of world they will inherit. I left the Lib Dems as I saw the damage being done to UK industry by the EU.

“Now, seeing how the Scottish Government's zealous implementation of the EU diktat has caused these bird mincers to spring up everywhere, I am sure we have to leave the EU.

“I look forward to working with UKIP because it is the only party that wants to leave the EU and is rapidly growing in both Scotland and the UK.

"I know UKIP is the only party to base its energy policy on real science. This science tells us that the small rise we expect from CO2 will not be a significant problem and may even be beneficial.

"There is absolutely no need to destroy our historic landscape like this. Almost every other country, except the EU superstate, has realised this "global warming" non-science is part of an anti-CO2, anti-industry, anti-modern life obsession by extremists in society. They would lead us to economic suicide.

"We must exit the EU before we suffer the fate of Greece, Spain and all the other countries that have been brought to the edge of economic ruin by the failed European Union”

ENDS

Cohesion against the madness of wind as a significant energy source

There are a plethora of anti- wind energy groups.

Some wonder why they are not better co-ordinated and why a new  political party has, despite being little more than a group of single issue lobbyists, has registered?

Don't be confused - the ant-wind lobbies are all united together against wind energy; they have a strong message and Scotland Against Spin does quite well in reaching out to them all. 

As they all, however, lack political clout, some have formed a party.  That doesn't solve the wider issue, because the new party's policies are inept.

The reason for the lack of proper clout lies in the persistence of  political loyalties amongst the lobbyists.  This makes it difficult for the various groups to present a single clear political message.

So,  for most part, they proclaim the need to be "non aligned" in order to keep folk on board.

No one who is truly active on any political issue, however, can be wholly devoid of a party political view or avoid a party preference; for the thinking majority, innate and natural party loyalties are hard to drop.  

It is impossible to divide one's soul between a blind loyalty and a conflicting political objective. So there in the unspoken coalition of supporters of all parties (all but UKIP supporters) in which each member silently bears the dilemma that the party for whom loyalty is felt, does in practise support, promote and implement the abhorrent wind energy polices.  

The question is, can "non-alignment" defeat the dynamics of that dilemma?  Need it?  Will the dilemma lead to much, or continual, repositioning?

When the opportunity to have an impact greater than simple objection and protest arrives, that is, when standing at the ballot box, each individual will have to face down their own demons.  

Will they vote then for undying loyalties that promote wind and accept the drive from the EU, or will they think afresh and vote for UKIP, against both the stupidity of wind as a significant energy source, and against the continued subjugation of the UK to EU rules?

We will have to wait to see what they do on the day. In the meantime Salmond sails on, the Coalition continues dodging, and the EU seems unassailable.  A huge rise in UKIP members and poll support for our clear message could, however, shock the incumbents into policy change.

Scotland's New Party

Created wholly out of the swelling disillusionment with the Governents' Energy Policies, a new anti wind turbine party has appeared on scene.

Of course it raises the anti wind profile, but it doesn't raise the chances of success for two good reasons - splits any real anti-wind vote away from UKIP, and, like the established incumbents, ignores the fact that the driver is the EU, to which they all kow tow.

The real threat to the complacency of those in power will come from UKIP when all anti-wind activists vote for us (secretly if they wish). 

Which party has a policy to scrap DECC?

Which party has a policy to Repeal the Act? 

Which party will STOP subsidies, not simply switch the revenue source? 
 

UKIP is turning the screw on the complacent governing elite.

A little anecdote for you all on lobbying methodology whilst the topic is in the air.

Demonstrations work, and I advocate regularity, e.g. a frequent demo at the Council and outside the MP and MSP surgeries, whenever they have them. As well as the bigger events.

But my anecdote relates to subtle political pressure: the ruling class is now very aware of the surge in membership and rise in popularity of UKIP, and are on watch to see that they are not outflanked by us. Is that so, you say? How does Mike know this?

Well, a few weeks ago I published a Press Release to the effect that UKIP will monitor cases for fraud etc. The Press ignored this but I published it on FB and Blogger, but I have since had several direct approaches by people suffering the blight of turbines, and at a loss as to what to do. They have all asked their elected representatives for help, and to little avail. So they called me, having found me via FB, my blog etc.

I am no expert, but have political experience and am now in the process of advising them - still to get round them all, some far afield, but I will do it. 

Now, here's the rub: I advised one caller, amongst other things, to write to a party leader specifically outlining the mix of horrors suffered and the lack of help received from the elected.  I also advised that the point should be made that UKIP had been approached - i.e. I was cc'd into the email to the said party leader. The point was to rattle a cage. Politics, you see. I also arranged to call to discuss the case.

Last week, I was able to visit as promised and on arrival was surprised to see another caller already there, discussing the case. The woman visitor concerned seemed a bit embarrassed when we were introduced, and she left without further ado. 

So what?

Well, it transpired that the visitor was an elected local councillor, and had revealed that she was calling on behalf of the said party leader and on behalf of the party's local MSP as well.  There is no doubt in my mind that the sudden and immediate attention, where previously there had been lethargy, was clearly a direct result of UKIP involvement and a party attempt to defend their indefensible policies and to cover their flank.

Get it right in 2013.............

Hi Folks
Please do think about this - I would say that if UKIP has the policy you want - e.g. to repeal the Climate Change Act - you should stress that time and time again.  

If you really want to put pressure on the Goverrnment, to rattle those cages, then bite the bullet and join UKIP and vote for us across the country - what can be wrong with voting for what you want, rather than for old loyalties - loyalties that are one way streets - loyalty expected from you by parties that have the wrong policies but implore you to stick with them?

Smell the coffee and make a sensible New Year's  Resolution to start playing "real politics".   You must have toyed with the idea - now do it.


Merry Christmas

UKIP SCOTLAND WILL REPORT WIND FRAUD TO POLICE

UKIP SCOTLAND WILL REPORT WIND FRAUD TO POLICE

The Leader and the Chairman of UKIP Scotland have announced that it is UKIP's intention to monitor fraudulant claims made by energy companies advancing plans for the erection and operation of wind turbines.

"We will do this and UKIP will report instances of any breach of the Fraud Act 2006, Chapter 35, Section 2, to the Police and UKIP will expect investigation and prosecution to follow, " Lord Monckton explained.

He had, as the Leader of UKIP Scotland, attended a private lunch hosted by UKIP Scotland's Chairman, Mike Scott-Hayward. They later visited the site of the wind farm at Little Raith, near Mossmoran, in Fife.
"This site is a good example of two big issues," said Mike Scott-Hayward.

"First, it shows two technologies in juxtaposition - one which represents a high energy density capacity industry, and the other, the wind farm, a low density energy system.

"It is becoming obvious now to even the most uninformed, people like many of our MSPs, that vast expanses of Scotland will need to be lost to wind farms in order to attempt to produce energy anywhere near the scale available form nuclear, oil, gas and coal. Wind is a wasteful, expense resource.

"Both technologies, secondly, do have a landscape impact - but again the contrast in how much land and the scale of the impact is marked. UKIP would scrap wind subsidies, repeal the Climate Change Act and abolish the Department of Energy and Climate Change. We can't go on with this wind energy stupidity."

Lord Christopher Monckton has been criss-crossing the globe challenging global warming orthodoxy. He is an expert on climate change science and policy. He said "My point regarding the Fraud Act is that it is against the law for energy companies or developers to misrepresent the facts in order to make a gain. They frequently falsely claim benefits arise from wind when they do not. Especially, they often make unqualified claims that wind farms will for example, provide power for several thousand houses. The implication is that will be for every hour of every day of the year - it is a blatant fraud, and thatb is a criminal act under the Fraud Act. We will expect the police to prosecute fraud."

Trying to take the wind from UKIP sails, Ruth?

The Tories are rattled - they know about and are reacting to the anti-wind demo held in Perth. They want to be sweet to the anti wind lobby, just as does Straun Stevenson MEP.  But they cannot hide the fact that Coalitionist Cameron leads the government that pays the subsidies.  The Tories have a choice - UKIP, which has a policy to repeal the Climate Change Act, abolish wind energy subsidies and scrap DECC.

Sea Change - too slow - take five easy steps now.

The vote was a good call, and the media does need to take notice of the real sea change,  but a far more effective measure would be for the dissenting Tories to take five simple steps to put it all right. 

They simply need to take five steps across the floor, become UKIP MPs and bring real infleunce to the House.

Tory Wind Bluff and Bluster

UKIP Scotland Chairman has dismissed a Tory ploy to hide the fact that the Coalition Government is behind funding the surge in wind farms.

"The Tories have now got everyone bothered about the costs of the planning system and about planning authorities being overwhelmed bybturbine applications.

 

"Yes, it is a waste, but let's get back to the real issue - the economic waste of useless turbines, and the desecration of our landscape. The cost of all the wind energy policies far outweighs the cost of the planning burden on councils, and the Tory politicians have cunningly got away from explaining why their party doesn't  scrap the subsidies and stop the whole nonsense.

 

"It's a red herring.

 

"Liz Smith MSP says 'It is extremely worrying that so many of these local authorities are unable to outline to overall financial cost of this.'

"So, can the Coalition Government outline the full costs of what all the subsidies will amount to over the full life of their schemes?  And how much of the country will be covered by wind farms?

 

"The Conservatives can't see the economic wood for the turbines"

Meercats could do it better than Alec

The incompetence of the SNP/Coalition/Brussels Wind Energy policy is horrifying. It lacks common sense and it seems, it also contravenes the Aarhus Convention.

Alec Salmond's pontifications certainly indicate that a so -called independent Scotland would be at risk under the the SNP.   And it is after all only wee pretendy independence anyway - Alex Salmond wants to be in the European Union - nothing independent or sovereign about that!

Once again, I must commend UKIP policy - real independence - sovereignty - for Team GB as a whole; and no wind power - no subsidies, no ROCs, no FITS, no laying the burden on the poorest, cessation of turbines spoiling our landscape. Simples, as the meercat says.

Media Blocks

Pleased to see that Alan Cochrane, writing in Scottish Field,  has taken up the issue of councillors being gagged.

Hurrah! I have been banging on about that for years - and even sent fruitlessly to the media - including the DT.

Ex Cllr Arbuckle used to say nice supportive things when I railed on over the issue in meetings of the Council, and he has since gone to his pet press and published as a journalist on the issue too.  Ironic, as his party was probably the driver for the gagging clause.

Annoying thing is that UKIP policy would put paid to the stupidity but the media seem to have a mental block when they see the letters UKIP - pavlovian beasts, they assume we are a one issue party.

Why don't they read of policies?

Make MSPs take the decison! Or give us binding referenda.

The most destructive planning phenomena we now face in Scotland is the resort to appeals when an elected council rejects a wind farm application.

Some Reporters may uphold the refusals decided democratically but that is not always the case. Communities face division and destruction of amenity as a result.

MSPs who have signed up the Scottish Parliament's pro wind policies and diktats, and whose parties all back subsidies and DECC line to the hilt, sit smugly away from the realities. I have yet to see or hear of my local MSP, for example, going to a community council meeting discussing wind issues, to see the effect of these policies on the community's constituents.

Whilst UKIP policy is that planning appeals would not be taken "out of county" by unelected officers but be decided by binding local referenda amongst the concerned communities/planning area, such trust of the electorate is an anathema to the other parties. It won't happen until UKIP has sufficient elected power in Westminster and Holyrood - on a par with our now being the second largest British party in the European Parliament.

Meantime, why do we have MSPs? Is it their role to sit smugly and aloof in Holyrood, and not carry the buck for what the laws they passed?

I say make them all, sitting in committee of the whole house, decide all wind farm appeals, with their votes recorded, so that we may know them for what they earn.

Mike Scott-Hayward
Chairman UKIP Scotland

Dumb Wind Politics

The views just expressed by Cllr Alex Rowley, Leader of Fife Council, that Fife is not to be closed to wind farms, shows the value to his party of the deft use of a call for a moratorium. It was never a policy to stop wind farms. But it gained him power, with the support of the Conservatives.

Only UKIP stands four square against wind turbines and the easiest political weapon to stop vast numbers of applications coming forward is to abolish the subsidies. That lies in the hands of the weak Coalition Government - weak because their few sensible Conservative MPs haven't the courage to kick the Lib Dems out, or to join UKIP en masse, and weak because the Coalition won't cross the EU diktat which sets the targets to be followed.

Within the restraints of current Government policy, UKIP Scotland fully endorses the the calls made by CATS: each point they make would be a huge bonus for Scotland - certainly a mandatory 2000 metre buffer zone between turbines and homes should be implemented now. Even if applied only to turbines over, say, 20 metres high, the current adverse impact would be reduced to a reasonable level. UKIP however, still contends that there should be no subsidy at all - there'd be precious few turbines even under 20 metres then - they are not self sustaining in any real sense. Farmers and ladowners now grab at turbines because, with the subsidy, they are the best available legal yield per acre!

It's a case of never mind the landscape or the economic realities - increase utility costs for all, bribe communities and subsidize useless machines for the sake of a daft political aim.

Beats me - even the dumbest politician must realise that there won't be many places left for a decent photo opportunity in an 'unspoilt' Scotland soon.

Noble Cause Corruption

Psychologists have a term for the wishful thinking by which we accept any means if the end seems virtuous: ‘noble-cause corruption’…Politicians are especially susceptible to this condition. In a wish to be seen as modern, they will embrace all manner of fashionable causes. When this sets in — groupthink grips political parties, and the media therefore decide there is no debate — the gravest of errors can take root. The subsidising of useless wind turbines was born of a deep intellectual error, one incubated by failure to challenge conventional wisdom.’


http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2012/06/osborne-versus-wind-farms/

OPEN LETTER TO ROD CAMPBELL MSP

OPEN LETTER

Rod Campbell MSP
Scottish Parliament
EDINBURGH

Dear Rod,
I write to seek your immediate active assistance on a matter of concern which is affecting communities across Scotland, but not least in my ward, East Neuk and Landward, in your constituency of North East Fife.

The concern is about the divisive impact which the Feed in Tariff and Community Benefit, provided to support the erection and operation of wind turbines, is having within communities.

The position is simple and easily understood.

We are witnessing a deluge of planning applications for wind turbines and wind farms in East Neuk and Landward, and across your constituency of North East Fife. The driver clearly is the financial benefit which accrues from the various forms of subsidy. I, and many others, consider that without those subsidies, the systems would be wholly uneconomic. A false market is being created and that is leading to considerable potential and actual change to our landscapes.

I would be content to deal with applications on their planning merits alone but I consider that the subsidies are bribes which distort reality. I consider that Scottish Executive's planned resultant pressure must even Have an undue influence on the objectivity of Planning Authority officials. They are human.

Communities are being offered wealth, based on those handouts. In East Neuk and Landward, we have witnessed the loss of a Community Council at Largoward, solely due to the division caused by just such a subsidised application.

Other Community Councils are also facing internal divisions and it may in fact be the case that the conflict of interests they now face is making fair representation by them of their communities impossible.

Further conflicts will arise through the very nature of these small rural communities. Moreover, it is often the case that many of the people who become members of Community Counils also step forward to run Trusts, of various sorts, set up to facilitate, or to gain access to, the subsidised funding packages. The conflicts are obvious.

I understand you were present for a short time at the beginning of a debate in Holytrood on this matter on Thursday 1st December. I hope you will now turn your full attention to this issue, follow the difficulties and debate within your communities and assess the impact which this SNP and Scotttish Executive policy is having.

I suggest you will be well advised to attend a few community council meetings in the East Neuk, the public meeting on the 1st March in St Andrews arranged by Cameron Community Council, and, yes, some sessions of the East Area planning committee.

I will be happy to meet you to elaborate on my concerns about the communities in my ward and in North East Fife in general.

This is, as you will know from the vast correspondence in our local and indeed, increasingly, in national papers, is a growing matter of public interest. I am therefore releasing this as an open letter.

Yours aye

Mike Scott-Hayward
Councillor
East Neuk and Landward

Chairman UKIP Scotland

Should we revamp the Met Office?

From a barbecue summer to ash clouds....is the Met Office cutting the mustard?

Perhaps we need a review of the way the Met Office is managed and funded. Did the National Air Traffic Service get the best advice before closing air space over the UK? Was there too much of a heavy hand from EuroControl?

Is there a politically correct atmosphere in the Met Office?

The Met Office feeds a lot of information to the IPCC - the source of glabal warming alarm. Is this sane? If the Met Office uses probablity rather reality, as they seem to have done with the ash clouds, is what they pass to the IPCC reliable?