Croydon Pride 2022

By Mike Swadling

“You might wonder did we get value for money?  Well Croydon’s politicians who got to speak to the assembled crowd certainly came across as if they thought so.  As an attendee I was less convinced”

The first Pride rally in London took place on 1st July 1972.  That means this year’s Pride events are not only the first big events since 2019 and the hiatus of lockdown they also commemorate 50 years since that first U.K. event. 

Croydon has hosted its own Pride event since 2016 when the first march went to Surrey Street, and we enjoyed a Council (Taxpayer) funded (to the tune of £30,000) party.  Since then ambitions have increased, and in 2018 Croydon Pride moved to Wandle Park, where it was hosted again in 2019 at a cost of £65,000 to local taxpayers.

You might wonder did we get value for money?  Well Croydon’s politicians who got to speak to the assembled crowd certainly came across as if they thought so.  As an attendee I was less convinced my taxes subsidising the over £5 a pint drinks in a cordoned off area for Pride was the best use of funds.  Of course, a few months later Croydon issued its first of two Section 114 notices, declaring de facto bankruptcy.  Money that could have been spent on social workers protecting the most vulnerable children in the borough was instead spent subsidising my weekends entertainment.  I didn’t want you to subsidise my weekend, I would rather the council spend the money on at-risk kids.

“Libraries have gone part time, Purley Leisure Centre is still closed, hundreds of jobs were lost, cuts were made to the anti-social behaviour team, yet still Croydon in 2022 appears to have found funds to sponsor Croydon Pride”

We’ve had two years of cuts to services and council scrutiny of budgets from central government.  Libraries have gone part time, Purley Leisure Centre is still closed, hundreds of jobs were lost, cuts were made to the anti-social behaviour team, yet still Croydon in 2022 appears to have found funds to sponsor Croydon Pride.  Now you might expect at this point I would state how much taxpayer funding had gone to Croydon Pride.  Ideally, I might even be able to point you to a press release stating Croydon’s sponsorship but alas no.  Despite Croydon being listed as a sponsor no record as I write this can be found of what funds are being paid from Croydon taxpayers for the 2022 Croydon Pride.  I again attended the 2022 Croydon Pride and was more than happy that private companies choose to advertise to offset the costs of the event.  This is exactly how these events should be paid for, by the market.  If people think this is worth sponsoring, if they want to be associated with the event, let them pay for it.

“At a time when people are struggling to pay their energy bills, why should Croydon taxpayers on minimum wage be forced to subsidise anyone’s weekends entertainment?”

The average household income in Croydon is £37,000 p/a, which with an average property price to buy at £387,767 and a median rent of £1,450 pcm, it’s not clear why working class Croydonians should subsidise what is clearly a very middle class event.  At a time when people are struggling to pay their energy bills, why should Croydon taxpayers on minimum wage be forced to subsidise anyone’s weekends entertainment?  Especially when front line services are being shut down.

An afternoon spent in glorious sunshine listening to music, I very much enjoyed Croydon Pride 2022.  I hope next year I can enjoy it more, knowing the event isn’t funded by forced subsidy from taxpayers and isn’t taking much needed funds from front line services.

Once I have been able to confirm the Croydon subsidy, I will of course let you know.

The TaxPayers’ Alliance in Purley.

On Saturday 30th July we had a great morning out in Purley with the TaxPayers’ Alliance asking residents if they think Croydon’s former Chief Executive Jo Negrini was worth her £613,895, 2020-21 remuneration package.

The publics response was overwhelming and clear, with only one person saying they felt the former Chief Executive deserved the remuneration.

Photo’s and a short video from the day below.

No Passport Required – Wednesday 17th August #ThirdWednesday

Come and meet-up with likeminded freedom lovers, at our No Passport Required drinks at The George, Croydon on Wednesday 17th August, from 7pm. 

We will hold these in association with Dick Delingpole’s #ThirdWednesday Libertarian drinks club. 

Come and meet us at The George. 17–21 George Street, Croydon. CR0 1LA on Wednesday 17th August, from 7pm.

Facebook: https://fb.me/e/3nRH7MSwz

What the Monetary Authorities Should Do

Why Low Rates and High Taxes Won’t Help Against Inflation

By Josh L Ascough

“Inflation; in the truest sense, is an excess increase in the money supply over the real demand for money (MS > MD)”

With CPI hitting a 40 year high of 9.1%, the Bank of England has responded by raising interest rates to 1.25%; up by 0.25 from the previous period. This, alongside ex chancellor and PM hopeful Rishi Sunak planning to ‘tackle inflation before tax cuts’, signals a poor plan for combating the rising effects of inflation.

Firstly inflation must be defined by its cause rather than its effect, in order for the monetary authorities to enact a sound policy of recovery. Inflation; in the truest sense, is an excess increase in the money supply over the real demand for money (MS > MD). MD; which is an inverse of velocity, is measured by the quantity of nominal pounds sterling economic actors hold over a period of time, in order to acquire a higher purchasing power for future consumption. Meaning individuals are withholding current consumption in preference of future consumption.

This time preference is an important concept, as it is the foundation of what makes interest possible. Other variables may effect interest rates; such as high risk or time till final settlement, but it is the time preference for future/current consumption which lays the foundation. Despite Milton Friedman’s wise words, inflation is not simply a monetary phenomenon, but a monetary and time phenomenon.

The time difference between the stages of production to consumption, alongside the furlough scheme during the 2020 Covid outbreak, can help to better understand the financial cost and trade-off people now face, and what the monetary authorities should do.

The Hayekian Triangle above denotes the stages and time process of production, where the production process is hypothesised as an input-output process; ‘the horizontal leg is representative of the production time, and the vertical leg is a measurement of the value of consumable outputs’ (Garrison, 2001).

“Another way of looking at the nature of the high inflation rate, is that an excess of money has entered the economy faster than the production of goods and services”

As economic actors restrict their current consumption in favour of future consumption, a pooling of the social savings occurs. This results in a structural change in the multi-period production process, whereby the later stages of production face a contraction and the early stages face an expansion. This allows for the rate of interest to fall, as there are more financial resources available for loans, investment, and expansion.

By withholding from current consumption, earlier stages of production are permitted to expand, so consumers in the future will be able to consume more goods they value for a lower price.

This is what occurs under “normal” circumstances. Due to lockdowns and the furlough scheme however, distortions in the money and time market have been brought to bear.

Another way of looking at the nature of the high inflation rate, is that an excess of money has entered the economy faster than the production of goods and services.

This can be observed by returning to an adjusted Hayekian Triangle:

Here the darker triangle represents the production process during the covid outbreak and lockdown, and the scattered grey triangle represents current consumption. Due to the lockdown, production processes in many stages were halted, and with stimulus payments via furlough going to businesses to keep them afloat and to ensure workers could still receive pay without productivity, the money supply was increasing faster than production was growing, because production was immobilised.

So why are we only now feeling the effects of inflation?

The distortion effects of inflation are not felt instantaneously, because money circulates through the economy at differing velocities for different sectors. This is why it is important not to only look at the average rate, but to look at all the price changes for the goods within the basket; this helps to identify where the excess money is circulating to-from, and how much.

Therefore not all price distortions will be the same; some will rise faster than others, some much slower; others may increase by larger percentages while goods valued less may increase by lower percentages.

This is seen by looking at the basket of goods for the CPI and PPI input goods, from the report of March 2022:

As shown above, the most extreme changes in the CPI and PPI reports were 31.4% for housing and household services, and 98.0% for crude oil, with a range between the extreme upper and extreme lower for both being:

The average rate of change shown in CPI and PPI reports is the mean (), and is calculated by adding the total % changes to one sum then dividing by the number of goods in the CPI and PPI baskets:

For the CPI:

Furthermore we can visualise the spread of the price distortions by using a dotplot:

Getting back to the matter, the low rate policy of the Bank of England, and the remaining high tax rates are not effective policy measures for curbing the rising inflation.

“it is saving and investment that will help fix the distortions, by allowing for secular growth deflation”

The high tax rates leave consumers with less expendable income, meaning their cost of living is forced up and are less inclined to save. Moreover, government spending contributes to circulating excess money supply, and simply changes the makeup of our GDP. Instead of goods consumers want, we get more of what government wants; instead of more houses and petrol, we get more ditches being dug up to be refilled.

Additionally the low rate policy of the bank of England fails to address that the excess money is being spent faster than is being saved; a low rate of interest fails to reflect not only people’s expectation of higher inflation to come, but the preferences economic actors presently hold for current consumption.

So what should the monetary authorities do?

With the current rate of interest being 1.25%, adjusted for inflation the real rate is in the negative; as is calculated:

The Bank of England should aim to raise interest rates to a minimum of 13.5%, so as to ensure after adjusting for inflation, the real rate would not be in the negative, but would sit at 4.4%. This would help to properly signal that now is an appropriate time to save, and assist in incentivising the private sector into such actions. This would also, in principle, help curb incentives for banks looking to take high risk loans.

By increasing the interest rate to a nominal level of 13.5% for non outstanding loans, savers and investors will see there is a high demand, so as to allow earlier stages of production to expand for high levels of future output.

Additionally, the government should temporarily freeze VAT and sales tax in order to reduce the tax burden on consumers during the cost of living crises.

Finally, the government should temporarily freeze the capital gains tax until inflation is brought down to its target rate of 2%. This would ensure that investors receive 100% of their returns, providing a further incentive for large scale investments into expanding production processes and creating new, value inducing jobs.

The inflation and cost of living crises were created by large injections of money into the economy, and it is saving and investment that will help fix the distortions, by allowing for secular growth deflation.

Despite the Keynesian “paradox of thrift”, increased saving is not a decrease in economic activity, but a dynamic process that invests in a wider, more affordable future consumption.

Sources:

Sat too long here for any good you have been doing

Image: U.K. Prime MinisterOGL 3, via Wikimedia Commons

“At the time it was often remarked he was one of only two politicians in the country who could stop traffic and would have cheering crowds wherever he went – the other being Nigel Farage”

During the 2008 London Mayoral election campaign my local paper, The Croydon Advertiser, asked a series of questions of then-Mayor Ken Livingston and Conservative candidate Boris Johnson about issues in the borough. Ken’s answers were as I recall perfectly adequate, but Boris’ I remember thinking at the time were written as if he had been a lifelong resident and his heart would always be in the town. Eight years later reading Zac Goldsmith’s answers to a similar set of questions, I thought he came over as if he had never been to the borough, had no intention of ever visiting, and the best we could hope for was he might mention the place to his staff in passing. Why am I writing about this? Well, it was clear Boris knew how to get a crowd onboard. Also, with Croydon being one of those outer London boroughs, a Conservative Mayoral candidate needs to pile on the votes to have any hope of winning. In stark contrast to the next Tory candidate, he or his team knew this interview mattered.

By the time Boris left office as Mayor, he had returned to parliament and was the leading light of the Vote Leave campaign. At the time it was often remarked he was one of only two politicians in the country who could stop traffic and would have cheering crowds wherever he went – the other being Nigel Farage. He delivered, at least in part, Brexit. The man who broke the Red Wall to win a stonking majority in the end simply ran out of steam.

“A policy started no doubt with the best intentions, stole our freedom, crushed our economy, set a precedent which future governments may reuse, was implemented by this megalomaniac who partied while the locked-down people suffered”

What will be Johnson’s legacy? My personal view is I believe him to be the worst Prime Minister in British history. Johnson was the man who placed in a form of house arrest sixty-seven million healthy people based on a computer model. The evidence from Sweden, and across the United States where similar states had radically different lockdown policies shows his withdrawal of our freedom didn’t save any lives. Indeed, the economic calamity, social impact and changes to our lifestyles may well be responsible for the ongoing increase in excess deaths. A policy started no doubt with the best intentions, stole our freedom, crushed our economy, set a precedent which future governments may reuse, was implemented by this megalomaniac who partied while the locked-down people suffered. However, I am aware, all too many were willing to accept lockdowns. So how do I believe he will be more generally viewed?

Boris campaigned in 2019 to “Get Brexit Done”. In that election he not only saw off the threat of Corbyn, but he also cemented a new Conservative coalition that broke the Red Wall and enabled us to retain our nations democratic traditions by delivering Brexit. It’s worth thinking through a counterfactual on delivering Brexit. Boris was handed Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement. He had two choices, make the best of that, or scrap it and try to get a more complete Brexit deal through a Remain voting parliament. With new parties being formed to stop Brexit, the Supreme Court and the House of Commons Speaker doing all they could to block the will of the people, Boris had little choice but to plough on with the deal he had. Once he had won that eighty-seat majority on a manifesto that included that deal, he had little choice but to deliver it. The Remain crowd arguably lost because they would accept no compromise. Their attempts to stop any form of Brexit meant we had to, at least for Great Britain, fully leave. Boris making the best of the cards he had been dealt, with help from the Brexit Party standing down candidates, took the only practical steps available to get us out of the European Union.

“The children of the middle classes are increasingly voting Labour following their university educations, the Tories need working class voters to stay focused on cultural rather than economic issues”

In winning that majority, Boris oversaw the completion of a journey that had been taking place for some years. Working class voters, who had traditionally voted Labour, moved from voting on predominantly economic grounds to more cultural and specifically patriotic grounds. Many of these voters had moved to the Conservatives, via voting UKIP or Brexit Party. With the Brexit Party stood down and UKIP imploded, Boris’ Conservatives rather than Brexit-betraying Labour became their natural home. At the time of writing, voting for the next leader is about to get underway. Whoever wins needs to retain that coalition of suburban and country middle class, and patriotic working-class voters for the Conservatives to win the next election. The children of the middle classes are increasingly voting Labour following their university educations, the Tories need working class voters to stay focused on cultural rather than economic issues. To secure this the next Prime Minister should act on the following:

  • Immediately ease the cost-of-living crisis by suspending or better still removing Net Zero targets and reducing environmental obligations and VAT on energy bills.
  • Get the economy going, by cutting taxes, speeding up the opening of free ports and opening fracking sites.
  • Stop the cross-channel traffic of illegal immigration. No government can claim competence when it can’t even defend our sea border.
  • Take a stand for free speech. Most areas of the culture war are a minefield, the Conservatives don’t want to be seen as the nasty party, but they can take a stand for free speech. In doing this they can pitch themselves as standing up for the little guy against the social media giants of Silicon Valley, which will resonate with direct speaking working class voters and older voters who grew up proud we were part of the free world.

Failure to act to retain the new coalition will not only see the Conservatives leave office at the next election it will destroy what little is left of Johnson’s legacy.

This article originally appeared in the Blacklist Press, Free Speech bulletin 18th July 2022.

Monetary Policy and Environmental Progress

Why Bad Money Drives Up Pollution

By Josh L. Ascough

“actions towards the green economy are for nought; not just while the tragedy of the commons and eminent domain remain, but while monetary policy remains in favour of secular inflation”

Many people are growing concerned about pollution and its growing effects on our environment and quality of life. So much so it seems, that politicians are now taking nuclear power much more seriously than previously.

We’ve seen a greater push towards solar and wind power, as alternative and more renewable means of providing energy for national and global economies.

Despite this, actions towards the green economy are for nought; not just while the tragedy of the commons and eminent domain remain, but while monetary policy remains in favour of secular inflation.

Secular inflation is a term used to describe a state of affairs, where the policy of the monetary authorities; in the UK’s case the Bank of England, is to have a prolonged or gradual increase in prices via inflation targeting. The current target of the Bank of England sits at 2%, so the BoE aims to increase the money supply (MS) over the quantity demanded (MD) during each period to meet their price index targets of an increase by 2%.

This excess expansion of MS, leads to a decrease in the purchasing power of the pound, meaning that money is not as valuable as it was in the previous period, nor is it as valuable as that of the base year. The base year, also known as year 1, is the starting point for measuring changes in the price level and purchasing power of money. It is derived as being equal to 1.00. If the purchasing power of the pound decreases by 50%, then the price index in year 2 will be marked as 1.50; similarly if the purchasing power increases by 50% it is marked as 0.50. (For more simple calculations shown later below, a comparison will be made between the price index of 2021 to 2020, rather than the base year).

From a secular inflation perspective, the value of money for one year holds an “expiration date” in the next year.

This policy effect on environmental quality and progress can be examined using the Kurznets Curve.

The Kurznets Curve measures environmental quality by per capita income.

“as we become richer, we place a higher value on the environment and are more able to maintain it”

The curve shows that as economies begin to develop, environmental quality worsens, because new activities are being enacted which impact the environment, but there is not enough monetary productivity to incentivise the maintenance of the environment. As per capita income increases, the cost of maintenance or seeking renewable alternatives, in proportion to income allows for a cleaner environment becomes a desired activity; as we become richer, we place a higher value on the environment and are more able to maintain it. This is shown by the location of low income; denominated as LYand HY in relation to their relationship to the x and y axis.

The problem is that the Kurznets Curve measures nominal income, rather than real income. Nominal income refers to the total quantity of current money (10 £50 notes = £500), whereas real income refers to the actual purchasing power of that £500. This real money balance is calculated as:

Where m is the real money balance, M is the nominal and P is the price index.

The current CPI 9.1, so the real value of the £500 is, so by comparing the price index of June 2021 (111.3), to June 2022 (121.8)

Meaning £500 M (nominal) from 2021 is worth £456.89 (£457 rounded) in m (real) in 2022.

We can also calculate the real level of income by denoting y as real income, and by dividing Y (the nominal level of income) by the price index P:

Suppose average per capita income is £30,000. According to the curve measuring nominal income, a per capita income of £30,000 should see us shifting to the right of the curve. However, adjusting to the real level of income via P we obtain:

This means that Y £30,000 level of income from 2021, is worth y £27413.79 (27414 rounded) level of income in 2022.

The trend of reduced real value can be shown further. Treating 2008 as the base year and looking towards the receding purchasing power of the pound, it can be observed how the pound has reduced in value over time:

This means that Y £30,000 level of income from 2021, is worth y £27413.79 (27414 rounded) level of income in 2022.

The trend of reduced real value can be shown further. Treating 2008 as the base year and looking towards the receding purchasing power of the pound, it can be observed how the pound has reduced in value over time:

Above we see a time plot of the real value of the pound from the period 2008 to 2022. The plot starts at the base year and looks at the value of the pound (measured in pence) for each year in comparison to the previous year. For example a nominal money balance of 100p in 2013 is worth 97.15 in real money balance terms, compared to nominal 100p in 2014, which is worth 98.10 in real balance terms.

We can also observe the contraction in real money balances as a comparison to the base year and further compare it to the year by year data:

In the graph the blue line represents the real value (m) of 100p on a year by year comparison (the real value of 100p in 2009 compared to the real value of 100p in 2010 etc), whereas the red line represents the onwards reduction in the real value of 100p compared to the previous years real value, from the point of the base year.

To give an example of this, in the period 08/09, the real value of 100p compared to the base year was 93.84, whereas in 09/10, the real value of that 93.84 in the next year was 92.02.

“The largest fall in real value occurred after the financial costs of the covid lockdown, where the real value of £30,000 in 2022 is £27,413.79”

A similar phenomenon can be observed with regards to wages. Supposing the median nominal income is £30,000, we can see the change in the real value of the median income over the period from 2008 to 2022:

Here we see the real value of income from 2009 to 2022, where 2008 is treated as the base year. During the aftermath of the 2008 financial crises, we see the real value of £30,000 drop from £29,480.97 in 2009 to £28,778.14 in 2011. The largest fall in real value occurred after the financial costs of the covid lockdown, where the real value of £30,000 in 2022 is £27,413.79.

Translated back to the Kurznets Curve then, it can show the following:

By adjusting nominal to real, we see that the slope of the curve rises and overall shifts further to the right. Meaning that adjusted to real money balances, renewal of the environment becomes a lot less affordable for the average person. As time moves on with a policy of secular inflation in place, the value of the £30,000 wage decreases, and people need to acquire higher nominal balances each year in order to reach previous levels of real income; ad infinitum.

This means that we are always a step behind (or according to the CPI, 9.1 steps behind) when it comes to environmental quality. This leads to one of the many costs of inflation; protection.

When people expect inflation to rise or to be constant, they spend resources to protect the value of their assets from the effects of inflation. This is in the form of personal finances, investing in precious metals such as gold or silver, or seeking advice from accountants.

While this type of activity is rational to the person(s) looking to protect themselves, it is also wasteful compared to the value that could’ve been satisfied had there been no inflation to begin with. This further adds to slowing down the process of per capita incomes moving to the right of the curve, because the loss of purchasing power for financial capital, diverts resources to “wasteful” endeavours.

Our current policy of price stability by injecting excess money into the economy, as an attempt to avoid deflating prices, provides us with the very effects that slow the Kurznets Curves process; a rise in output prices which detract from falls in unit production costs.

If we want to take environmental degradation, and improving the environments quality seriously, then it is important to address secular inflation and abandoning the policy of inflation targeting, in favour of a productivity norm to allow for growth deflation, financial stability and a reduction in unit production costs to spur on reduced output costs.

Sources:

Podcast Episode 72 – Tam Laird: Tory Leadership Race, IndyRef2 & Scottish Libertarianism

We talk about Boris Johnson’s downfall and the Tory Leadership Race. We are then joined by Tam Laird, the leader of the Scottish Libertarian Party, to discuss Nicola Sturgeon’s demands for a second Scottish Independence referendum. Finally, we chat with Tam about his background and the Scottish Libertarian Party.

Spreaker

iTunes


Google Podcasts


Podchaser

Podcast Addict
Deezer

Spotify


Stitcher


Castbox

YouTube starting when Tam Laird joins to podcast:

The Scottish Libertarian party can be found online at http://scottishlibertarians.com/, on Twitter at https://twitter.com/ScoLibertarian, and on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/ScottishLibertarians/

Press Release: THE TAXPAYERS’ ALLIANCE, TOWN HALL RICH LIST ROADSHOW COMES TO PURLEY

The TPA are coming to Purley on the 30th July for the latest leg of the Town Hall Rich List Roadshow.

The TaxPayers’ Alliance, was launched in 2004 to speak for ordinary taxpayers fed up with government waste, increasing taxation, and a lack of transparency in all levels of government.

Following years of waste at Croydon Council and the de facto bankrupting of the borough, they are coming to Purley on the 30th July for the latest leg of the Town Hall Rich List Roadshow.

The TaxPayers’ Alliance have held several street stalls in Croydon prior to the issuing of a Section 114 notice and Croydon declaring de facto bankruptcy, these have focused on executive pay. Their review of Councillors’ allowances highlighted the premium rates councillors received compared to nearby colleagues, and the town has too often featured on their Blog.. The taxpayers and service recipients of Croydon would all be better off if the council had listened when the TPA all too frequently highlighted our town.

Now, with assistance from the Croydon Constitutionalists, they will be asking local residents whether they thought Croydon’s former Chief Executive Jo Negrini was worth her £613,895, 2020-21 remuneration package.

Locals will have the opportunity to have their say, by using ping pong balls to cast their votes. Croydon Council’s political make-up has changed, but with many tough years ahead this is an opportunity for people to say if they want to retain the council’s remuneration habits of the past.

The street stall will be open Saturday 30 July, 10:30 am – 1pm, outside 911 Brighton Rd, Purley CR8 2BP.

If you would like more information about this topic, please contact Michael Swadling at [email protected].

Full Release PDF:

‘Mr Brexit’ – Boris Johnson

Image:U.K. Prime Minister, OGL 3, via Wikimedia Commons

By John Broadfoot

“led by principal Remainers Theresa May/Gavin Barwell, who gave away all our negotiating power to their friends in the EU, so we would have Brexit in name only”

For me the EU Brexit Referendum in 2016 changed the whole UK political dialogue and media background. The divisions/animosity between Brexiteers and Remainers were much greater, deeper, than the traditional Left/Right political differences experienced before 2016. There was a real hatred, lack of respect that was made even worse when a Remain Parliament, a Remain Establishment, a Remain Civil Service and a Remain media so obviously tried to block the democratic will of the EU Referendum majority by blocking/delaying Brexit so sneakily and dishonestly – led by principal Remainers Theresa May/Gavin Barwell, who gave away all our negotiating power to their friends in the EU, so we would have Brexit in name only.

Fortunately for Brexiteers (and the UK) real local democracy returned to the UK from the undemocratic EU via a true Brexit, thanks to Mr Brexit – PM Boris Johnson. He swept to power in 2019 on a Brexit vote and sealed the fate of the Remainers and we left the EU. Remainers/Rejoiners went underground to regroup in the face of a Brexit PM with a whopping 80 seat majority. They soon realised that their only hope was to attack and unseat Mr Brexit himself – Boris Johnson, and so began a concerted, co-ordinated attack on the man himself – it was their only hope in the short term. For Labour too it was a possibly quicker route back to power after the Corbyn disaster years.

“If there is a slow news day, our febrile, out of control, unaccountable, left wing, UK Remain “gotcha” media will now invent stories by always taking the worst line on any issue/comment”

Unfortunately, at the same time the background UK political/media landscape had now changed radically, and this helped the Remainers a lot. Since 2016 the UK press/media have gorged themselves on a Referendum, leadership elections, General Elections in UK and USA and the battle with the EU over the Brexit treaty. Virtually everything is now breaking news. If there is a slow news day, our febrile, out of control, unaccountable, left wing, UK Remain “gotcha” media will now invent stories by always taking the worst line on any issue/comment that could possibly be interpreted two ways. They do this just to invent stories and fill in breaking news gaps. The only news items now not in breaking news appears to be the weather.

The febrile “gotcha” UK media now also encourages the UK opposition party (Labour) to campaign for re-election the day after they lose an election. In the old days there would be a break for 2/3 years before electioneering began in Year 3/4 of a Parliamentary term. The UK media desperate for breaking news will give the opposition limitless media coverage – especially if they reflect the editor’s political views too, as so clearly happens with the leftie BBC.

Everyone in politics is now forensically investigated to see if there any skeletons in their cupboards, like smoking a joint when a student etc. Watch this inevitably happen with the new Conservative leader/PM. Every policy statement will be forensically analysed, criticised, exaggerated. The UK in my view is now virtually ungovernable because of our febrile unaccountable “gotcha” UK media. No one person can be on top of his/her brief all the time and EVERYONE makes mistakes. Should Sir Kier Starmer or anyone else get into power they will face the ferocious UK breaking news media and will be found out too on many occasions, depending on the bias of that particular media outlet.

“Boris achieved much – Brexit, full employment, best vaccination programme, social care reform, fastest exit and growth from Covid and history will treat him better when measured against his successors”

Thus, we now live in a world where you are not allowed a single mistake by the media/public. Plus, politically motivated civil servants (Remainers, Cummings etc) will now routinely leak anything detrimental to a political opponent or party. Any innocent off the cuff remark/joke in a meeting will be exaggerated and leaked to the media. In addition, political leaders around the world are expected to predict the most unimaginable, unique, unforeseen new problems. Who could have foreseen Covid, European war, subsequent raw materials and cost of living crisis etc?

Boris achieved much – Brexit, full employment, best vaccination programme, social care reform, fastest exit and growth from Covid and history will treat him better when measured against his successors in this new Putin/energy/food/raw materials crisis world we now live in. Yes, he made mistakes when working exhausted 365 days a year with an unrelenting 24/7 schedule but it will be interesting to see how a more Remain friendly leader/party in government is treated by the febrile, Remain, left wing media/establishment.

Do you want a solid leader who generally makes the right calls but occasionally tells the odd porky or do you want a clueless, boring, politician like Starmer with no apparent policies and who will try to get us back into the EU? Or a Blair that takes us into an illegal war killing thousands? Maybe Boris wasn’t so bad after all? His planned removal has certainly improved Labour’s chances at the next General Election and Remainers/Rejoiners will have a new spring in their step now that Mr Brexit has been deliberately hunted down by Remainer MPs, Remainer Civil Servants, the establishment and the insatiable “gotcha” media.”

“the UK public are increasingly switching away from traditional news providers like the BBC, Sky, Channel 4 etc and either switching to new, more measured, channels like GB News or Times Radio”

Because the febrile UK media are now inventing so many “breaking news” (fake) stories to fill gaps on quiet news days, the UK public are increasingly switching away from traditional news providers like the BBC, Sky, Channel 4 etc and either switching to new, more measured, channels like GB News or Times Radio, or are simply switching off from the BBC for example. Over 2 million BBC Licence holders have not renewed their licences in the last year. A just repayment of years of BBC left wing, Remain, EU bias.

The TaxPayers’ Alliance, Town Hall Rich List Roadshow comes to Purley.

The TaxPayers’ Alliance, was launched in 2004 to speak for ordinary taxpayers fed up with government waste, increasing taxation, and a lack of transparency in all levels of government.

Following years of waste at Croydon Council and the de facto bankrupting of the borough, they are coming to Purley on the 30th July for the latest leg of the Town Hall Rich List Roadshow.

With assistance from the Croydon Constitutionalists, they will be asking local residents whether they thought Croydon’s former Chief Executive Jo Negrini was worth her £613,895, 2020-21 remuneration package.

Locals will have the opportunity to have their say, by using ping pong balls to cast their votes.  Croydon Council has changed, but with many tough years ahead this is an opportunity for people to say if they want to retain the council’s remuneration habits of the past.

Come and join us, to help the people of Purley send a message to the council.

We hope to see you Saturday 30 July, 10:30 am – 1pm.  In Purley, outside Andrews Estate Agents 909-911 Brighton Rd, Purley CR8 2BP.

Facebook: https://fb.me/e/1RgXJZniH