We are joined by Andrew Allison, the Chief Executive of The Freedom Association, as we discuss the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the latest financial woes at Croydon Council. We then chat with Andrew about his background and the great work of The Freedom Association.
A humanitarian crisis is unfolding before us following Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine. The risk of a major military conflict is remote but real, and the situation on the ground continues to change. We asked our contributors how they think Putin’s aggression will impact politics and policies in the UK and what if any changes are needed?
“The people of Ukraine do not deserve to have their homes, their lives and even their children blown to bits by Russian missiles. That is obvious. But too little sympathy is being shared with citizens of Russia … who are currently being severed from the outside world”
As noted author, detective and volunteer firefighter Lemony Snicket once wrote, if everyone fought fire with fire, the whole world would go up in smoke. It is worth considering that quote in the context not merely of Russia’s actions in Ukraine, but also the actions of our own governments both leading up to and during the crisis.
First, I make no apologies for Vladimir Putin, whose unconscionable escalation to violence is but a less restrained expression of how he treats his own people. But neither do I think very highly of Volodymyr Zelenskyy or his government, who are not blameless in this conflict and deserve to be subjected to far more scrutiny than the present consensus permits. Truly, I do not care which group of corrupt, rights-abusing kleptocrats strut through Kyiv’s ministry buildings.
The people I care about, and for whose wellbeing I state my case are the innocent people caught up in this game of thrones, both Russian and Ukrainian alike. The people of Ukraine do not deserve to have their homes, their lives and even their children blown to bits by Russian missiles. That is obvious. But too little sympathy is being shared with citizens of Russia (and, it must be noted, the Russian-speaking people of Donbass), who are currently being severed from the outside world, worldly comforts denied, their whole lives and prospects rent asunder, and subject to the most outrageously fervent racism courtesy of the Tolerant and Inclusive. Whether Vladimir Putin brought that upon them or not, the fact is that it is “us” – our governments, Western media, Western corporations, who are doing it to them. It must stop.
Our leaders have no moral high ground from which to lob criticisms at Vladimir Putin. When the likes of Justin Trudeau, Joe Biden and Scott Morrison call him an enemy of freedom and democracy, who is it that Mr Putin sees? A bunch of blood-stained hypocrites. Who would take seriously these charlatans posing as respectable people, when they call for peace, unity, restraint and diplomacy? As if they hadn’t invaded nations on flimsy pretexts. As if they hadn’t murdered foreign civilians in pursuit of self-righteous conquest. As if they don’t turn those guns on their own civilians when convenient. As if they allow peaceful protest. As if they don’t collude to spread propaganda. As if they operate with a free press. As if they don’t fiddle with elections, both in their own countries and abroad. As if, begging your pardon, they hadn’t committed war crimes. As if Ukraine don’t also shell civilians, imprison political leaders, ban opposition parties, and entertain radical elements. As if they, the whole stinking lot of them, weren’t corrupt… so horribly, openly, intractably corrupt.
One cringes to see these self-appointed arbiters of moral virtue in charge of making the serious decisions affecting the lives of millions – possibly, even, billions, at least if the prospect of nuclear war has any legs to it. But they’re not serious people, and a serious response to Russia is unlikely to come in any good time before the damage – to both Russia and Ukraine, to the geopolitical situation as it pertains to China, and to the obvious self-harm we’re doing to our economy and, naturally, the poorest in our society – can be contained. A whole world up in smoke, ourselves included, with many lives lost or diminished, and for what? For the hypocrites to grandstand about the fire while they fan the flames.
A serious response involves recognizing that Russia is a legitimate nation with legitimate national interests, not merely a pariah state Soviet caricature led by the new Hitler, and then treating them as such. A serious response involves being an exemplar of the values of ‘freedom and democracy’ you claim to represent, rather than that now-cliched slogan being the war cry which precedes drone strikes, propaganda, and destroying the lives of innocent civilians.
I won’t be holding my breath.
“Anyone might be forgiven for thinking we are not actually supposed to understand the situation. After all, how can anyone believe our Western leaders are sincere in shouting ‘Freedom!’ when they have spent the past two years depriving their citizens of their most basic and important rights and liberties?”
Zack Stiling, Heritage Party candidate Selsdon and Addington Village.
The Ukraine situation is so confused that I am in no position to make confident predictions, but there are a number of possible outcomes which I hope will not materialise. In our rush to virtue signal, some voices among us have called for all manner of dangerous, unethical or self-destructive policies. Currently, the only victims of the war between Russia and the Ukraine are the unfortunate Russian and Ukrainian citizens who have been dragged into it. If some warmongers have their way, people everywhere will suffer.
To illustrate: the ban on Russian oil imports means British citizens are paying record prices for petrol and it is anticipated that energy bills could reach £3000 a year. This is a pointless act of national self-harm. Just when you think the EDL’s particular brand of bigotry is dying out, along comes Conservative MP Roger Gale to revive it, only this time it’s Russians instead of Muslims. Gale spoke on Talk Radio of the need to ‘send everyone home’, including the ‘good and honest and decent Russians in this country’. What possible moral grounds can there be for making thousands of innocent people victims of a war in which they have played no more part than any native British people? Let’s not get started on the toy-soldier enthusiasts who behave as if they think Britain really needs another raging war.
What do we really want to achieve and what do we think we’re fighting for? And who’s really to blame? Obviously, Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine cannot be excused or justified, but the pantomime portrayal of the situation in which the Ukraine is a damsel in distress, the West her Prince Charming and Russia the evil stepmother must not persist. Through the expansion of NATO, the West has gone against the advice of its own diplomats and terms it had agreed with Russia, and in doing so provoked Russian aggression. Nor is the Ukraine blameless; when it was formed, it absorbed many people who considered themselves Russian. By implementing a series of anti-Russian policies, the Ukraine hastened the breakdown of its relationship with its neighbour. And if anyone thinks Putin has always been the bad man for his oppression of opposition media, they might be surprised to find that Zelensky has the very same blots on his escutcheon.
The majority of people will not know these things because the propaganda drive is well underway. Truths which do not conform to the narrative are suppressed and shouted-down. Doublethink is rife: apparently we are supposed to believe that Russian soldiers are inhuman devils, while simultaneously understanding that they have no wish to be in Ukraine and are fighting against their will. Russia Today may not be a reliable source of news, but its censorship deprives us of something vital: a different perspective.
Anyone might be forgiven for thinking we are not actually supposed to understand the situation. After all, how can anyone believe our Western leaders are sincere in shouting ‘Freedom!’ when they have spent the past two years depriving their citizens of their most basic and important rights and liberties? Whether it’s Russia or the Ukraine and the West which emerge the victor in this little skirmish is really an academic matter. The practical reality is that the arrogant, corrupt and unaccountable politicians who have created this situation will survive it unscathed, while ordinary citizens pay the price, whether it be with their wallets, their rights or their lives.
What we should be doing is making every effort to maintain peaceful relations with Russia while encouraging its withdrawal from the Ukraine by diplomatic means (which may require encouraging the Ukraine to rethink some of its longstanding anti-Russian policies). It is not our war and aggression will only hurt us all.
“Putin the aggressor, moved his troops into Ukraine to take what he wants. Where does this stop and who will be next if he wins the Ukraine battle. When Putin took Crimea, the west did very little to stop him, he flexed his muscles and tested how the land lies”
I am not a war expert and talk only of what I have seen and read. I hate war and my heart breaks at the thought of people, especially children are being killed for no real reason other than a bully who wants to.
So, Putin the aggressor, moved his troops into Ukraine to take what he wants. Where does this stop and who will be next if he wins the Ukraine battle. When Putin took Crimea, the west did very little to stop him, he flexed his muscles and tested how the land lies. This is not WW3, but it could be, if anyone from the West bowed to calls for a no-fly zone. This stance must remain and Boris at present is handling everything well. I believe that the young people of Russia need to protest on a mass scale to get Putin out. I think the young people in Russia want peace and do not wish to kill their neighbours, who are family and friends. I don’t believe Putin is not mad, but he is a bully that needs to be stopped.
It’s amazing how quick Europe got so heavily dependent on Russia’s Gas and oil, some Countries with 100% dependency and the likes of Germany at 40%. Billions are being frozen all around the world from Russia and Russian bank accounts and assets. Yet Europe and even the UK are handing Russia Billions for their oil/gas while handing Millions to the Ukraine in aid. How perverse is this?
We as a country are supporting the Ukraine and must continue to do so. Aid, arms, finance and other needs the country may have. The need to help Ukrainian’s women and children to enter UK must be done in a humane and measured way. Records must be kept of Visa applications of who is coming into the country and make sure this is a temporary measure until its safe for them to return to their homeland. Now I understand that Priti Patel is allowing Ukraine’s to apply for Visa’s online which will speed up the process, if they have passports.
Going forward the UK needs to look at how we survive in the future. We are an Island nation dependant on so many countries to feed us, manufacture all our home devices, white goods and utilities. We need to get back to our industrial age although being greener in how we do that. We need to get back to farming on a big scale to feed ourselves. We need to do that before we build on all our farms and green spaces with housing.
What this war in Ukraine and the Covid 19 pandemic has shown us in the last two years is how our freedoms were swept away by Parliament who all agreed a covid law. We as citizens are constantly being pitted against one another in all sorts of issues. While Parliament has all morphed into socialists and against most of the people. It has shown us how governments can shut off all our bank accounts, food can be stopped from entering the country and they can turn off our utilities at the touch of a button. The UK Government need to nationalise our utilities and stop foreign companies from controlling them. Food, heat and water are not nice to have, they are essentials to live and must be protected. If we were to ever be attacked so much could be held from as with food, power and other necessities.
The government must reflect on these issues and introduce policies that will ensure these essentials needs for its nation. Our freedoms in a democracy must be upheld and not changed to suit parliament and everyone from other countries. Anyone entitled to live in this country should not expect to change or alter our freedoms or our way of life. Our governments preach all around the world about our democracy but are in fact moving away from what they preach. We as a diverse nation must stop these changes and stick together through the ballot box. Parliament with all its parties have been against the majority of the people in this country for a number of years now. We need to pull together as a nation to change the whole rotten system.
“The obvious truth is that the only way we can really help a country under attack from a larger army, would be for Challenger tanks, RAF jets and infantry regiments to join the fight and destroy the invading forces.
But another obvious truth is that military intervention of this kind would undoubtedly lead to far greater harm to human life, rather than less, and potentially without limit”
Do we really think these sanctions will make any meaningful difference to this war? Are we so naive to think that the Kremlin didn’t anticipate them beforehand?
So why do our politicians do it? Is it really to help the Ukrainians as they claim? Some of them are probably foolish enough to think so. But for the more senior figures with broader considerations, such as the Prime Minister, it isn’t.
The obvious truth is that the only way we can really help a country under attack from a larger army, would be for Challenger tanks, RAF jets and infantry regiments to join the fight and destroy the invading forces.
But another obvious truth is that military intervention of this kind would undoubtedly lead to far greater harm to human life, rather than less, and potentially without limit.
Our economic intervention on the other hand, like a great majority of government decisions, is to defend the integrity of the government in the court of public opinion, as they hastily judge it, and defend its future electability.
Rightly, millions of people demand justice for what has happened, I’m one of them, and hopefully one day when the conflict is over the Ukrainian people will get it.
But politicians, especially of the calibre that we have today with neither courage or conviction, are ultra-sensitive to their vulnerability in this regard and are desperate to signal otherwise. And in that desperation often comes ill-considered and utterly unprincipled action that does more harm than good.
This economic virtue signalling at the expense of innocent people in Russia does absolutely no good at all and needs to stop.
A humanitarian crisis is unfolding before us following Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine. The risk of a major military conflict is remote but real, and the situation on the ground continues to change. We asked our contributors how they think Putin’s aggression will impact politics and policies in the UK and what if any changes are needed?
“We ought to all agree that Putin is “to blame” but errors were made by the West and Ukraine. To mention this however is to invite the accusation of being a Putin shill”
The first casualty of war is the truth, so we are now long past looking at the causes. We ought to all agree that Putin is “to blame” but errors were made by the West and Ukraine. To mention this however is to invite the accusation of being a Putin shill, so we might as well gloss over them.
When seeking directions, as the Oirish say, I would not start from here. Putin cannot lose and escape with his life, so the options are
Putin wins. I think this is the least likely. I can see no scenario where he “wins”. His economy will sink like a stone.
Palace coup, 15 minute show trial on a mobile phone and execution. My preferred option.
WW3, because Putin looks like losing, but retains control in Russia. My least preferred option.
Long drawn out conflict, Afghanistan on steroids, really sorry, but I think this is the most likely outcome.
To be brutally horribly cynical, option 4 is quite good for the UK. Self-indulgent drivel like Indyref2, lockdown fetishism, personal pronouns, critical race theory and most of all Net-Zero will be forgotten in the face of far bigger things. But Freedom of Speech will be a hard sell for those of us who believe in it.
It’s even fairly good for the EU. The EU was facing a genuine existential crisis in the face of Brexit, Net Zero and the Culture war. Six months ago the EU was threatening to cut off funds to Hungary and Poland for being naughty. Now, there is no danger of them cutting off funds, and in any case, Hungary and Poland have rapidly lost the will to be naughty.
Its also the option the West should be playing for, because it leaves Option 2 in play and keeps option 3 out of play.
But it’s going to be hell for Ukraine.
“The Principle is perfectly clear that the sovereignty of any territory is no longer determined by war, history, geography or religious scriptures of any kind but solely by the wishes of the people who live there today. Putin by contrast regards Ukrainians as Russians regardless of their own wishes”
Given that we cannot directly confront Russia militarily in Ukraine as they are not a member of NATO we must play the long economic game. In particular Germany and Italy must wean themselves off Russian oil and gas. It may take some time, but eventually Putin will fall and his successors will sue for economic peace and the occupation will be ended as part of that deal.
Yesterday Putin came clean. He does not after all believe in the Principle of Self-determination of Sovereignty, which is enshrined in international law, contrary to what as he has previously indicated. He accepts now that he is acting illegally and doesn’t care, reverting instead to the base and uncivilised human instinct for territorial domination and imperialism. The Principle is perfectly clear that the sovereignty of any territory is no longer determined by war, history, geography or religious scriptures of any kind but solely by the wishes of the people who live there today. Putin by contrast regards Ukrainians as Russians regardless of their own wishes.
This crisis just emphasises yet further the inadequacy of the UK’s immigration and refugee policy, and that incudes UKIP’s own policy. As a member of UKIP’s NEC I am currently arguing for manifesto changes as follows:
We need an auctioned quota system for long-term immigration, not a points-based system. I would set the quota at 50,000 a year fewer than the number who emigrate each previous year, so we have a background of depopulation going on. This country is dangerously overpopulated and, as any competent social psychologist will tell you, overpopulation leads to competition for scarce resources, which in turn leads to a fracturing of society along the nearest visible fault line. Today that is racism. It used to be classism. Either way Labour subversively ramps it up for their own selfish identity purposes, thereby making racism worse. A policy of depopulation will reduce that risk not increase it, as well reducing shortages of housing, access to essential public services, wild habitat, overloaded sewage works overflowing into our rivers and may other forms of environmental contamination as well as the fact that we can now only grow 55% of the food we eat.
You cannot humanely turn refugees away, and it also impossible to distinguish objectively between refugees and other illegals (ok, I know there are plenty of cynics out there who say it is quite easy, but that is not legally sufficient). Also it is all very well saying they should return to the first safe country they come to, but those countries are not co-operating and anyway have severe immigration crises of their own. With a quota system we can instead bring them in and allocate them free of charge to the quota and correspondingly reduce the number available to normal auction sponsors so the total quota is not breached. If the number is greater than the quota in any year it can be spread over several years. Either way refugees and illegals should be given special refugee passports, saying for example British Ukrainian Refugee Passport, which would only be valid until the occupation has ended. When they return home their quota places can be returned to the quota.
In the meantime we should be looking to purchase a large tract of habitable land somewhere outside Europe where, with the agreement of the host country, we can set up a refugee colony as British Sovereign territory, so we can then transfer all new arrivals there immediately. This would be outside the quota but still British sovereign territory so that even a successful appeal for asylum would not require moving them back to the UK. They would already have the refuge they need there. I am not proposing this as a cheap or punitive option (unlike Australia). It must be done properly with open borders, law and order, security, benefits, housing, and public and personal support services enabling them to engage in economic activity which should lead to self-sufficiency and achieve a reasonable standard of living in the longer term. It would use the host country’s currency but under our economic management, thereby enabling trade with the host country and giving that country a substantial regional and national economic and export boost as part of the deal. In the short term we can use some of the massive overseas aid budget which is currently doing little useful other than assuage some people’s guilt complexes.
I welcome any comments or additional observations so we can construct as practical and acceptable a policy as possible.
“I am not at all surprised that most of the western governments have acted to cut Russia off (and our future gas supplies, of course) with their gesture politics…..Our same government said that PM Johnson didn’t go to parties when thousands of non-Etonian people were prevented from seeing their loved ones!”
Laurence Williams, London and South East Coordinator for the UK Libertarian Party.
It’s a loaded question, ‘Putin’s aggression’, ‘Putin’s actions’ would have been better, but, though I detest war and its repercussions, I am not in the least surprised as to it happening. Yet another US proxy war, this time starting in 2014 with a President Obama organised coup, followed by 8 years and 15K casualties in the Russian speaking east at the hands of Ukrainian forces, is the perfect storm. Given that the Ukraine has national guard units modelled on Nazi Germany’s SS, and that these units committed unspeakable crimes against their own in WW2, they have now ‘modernised’ into having some 15 US bio – chemical facilities, just like Saddam Hussein was supposed to have in Iraq!
I am not at all surprised that most of the western governments have acted to cut Russia off (and our future gas supplies, of course) with their gesture politics. Two years ago, these same governments said that we must all be vaxxed with an un-tested toxin, against a Common Cold! Our same government said that PM Johnson didn’t go to parties when thousands of non-Etonian people were prevented from seeing their loved ones!
Cutting off Russia in the sports, and now our football clubs brandishing Ukrainian flags is just gesture politics like ‘taking the knee’, it just winds people up. The Olympics is dead for sure now, and so, hopefully, it the Eurovision song contest!
A humanitarian crisis is unfolding before us following Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine. The risk of a major military conflict is remote but real, and the situation on the ground continues to change. We asked our contributors how they think Putin’s aggression will impact politics and policies in the UK and what if any changes are needed?
“Ukraine constitutes unfinished business from the end of WWII, the breakup of the USSR and the Cold War we had the arrogance to believe we had won. What is playing out now, in the worst that humanity can offer, is a failure of vision, leadership and values on all sides. For the west only, add inconsistency”
Peter Sonnex, veteran, former Brexit Party candidate and political campaigner.
I despair. As an Army Veteran, I ache for the senselessness and failure that is armed conflict – the so-called last resort in our international rules-based order. Of course, there are those whose interests will be satisfied by all this and who will benefit from it in some way. Then, there are the rest of us, the ordinary citizens of the west, Russia and Ukraine who are paying the price.
Ukraine has been an independent state for more than thirty years. It has aspired to join the EU and NATO. Such memberships have not been forthcoming, and we ought to ask ourselves why this should be. For everyone hailing and siding unequivocally with the bravery and resolve of a sovereign Ukraine in the face of Russian ‘special military operations’, I’m sorry, it’s all a bit bloody late.
To be clear, I am no cheerleader for Vladimir Putin. In a protracted game of chess it is he, with Sergey Lavrov (with whom I have shared the same room), who has had the longer-term strategy in mind. Short-term, narrow-minded EU and NATO sabre-rattling, whilst failing to put their money where their mouth is has not helped. Annexation of Crimea and the Donbas without consequence has not helped. An ongoing civil war in Ukraine has not helped. A young country with divided communities and conflicting loyalties has not helped. For all of us, Ukraine constitutes unfinished business from the end of WWII, the breakup of the USSR and the Cold War we had the arrogance to believe we had won. What is playing out now, in the worst that humanity can offer, is a failure of vision, leadership and values on all sides. For the west only, add inconsistency.
I’m very nearly done with it. The same people who brought a disproportionate response to Covid-19 and are stoking the fires of a climate crisis without first considering our prosperity and energy security, have delivered another war and another humanitarian crisis in Europe. We can be outraged, even signal our virtue, but not while conflicts and humanitarian crises are evident over the rest of the world with hardly a mention – some facilitated by us.
We might change how we vote in order to challenge the incompetence inherent in the unacceptable status quo – no?
Back to the question, but I’m afraid with even more questions… If we were to substitute Northern Ireland for Ukraine and the institutions of the EU for Russia – how might we consider an answer? Clear to me are the ambitions of the EU as they may relate to the island of Ireland. Clearer to me is the lack of resolve at home to defend the Union of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of which I am a citizen. Do the unionists in Northern Ireland have the resolve to send the clearest message in May elections to those who hold their interests elsewhere that the Union is worth defending? Or will our apathy hitherto over Ukraine and now over Northern Ireland prevail until it is likewise too late?
If you thought chess was complicated, wait until you try Mah-jongg…
“For us here in the UK, we must be careful not to join the war mongering drum beating narrative, desperately trying to emotionally manipulate public opinion into supporting military action by the international community with a no fly zone”
The situation with Russian military action in Ukraine is much more complex than the narrative being promoted by the mainstream media and those that control them. We are being led to believe that Putin is as always the “big bad wolf” and Ukraine is the innocent victim of a bully. It is not that cut and dry! There is propaganda on both sides. Quite frankly I am very reticent to agree with the same people who have fed us a steady diet of lies for the past two years concerning the pandemic and all things associated with it, call me a sceptic if you wish! The news cycle has suddenly shifted from covid, mandates, masks and vaccines to Ukraine/Russia. Covid has been completely abandoned by all major news outlets.
Several European nations EU member states have been manoeuvred into a very precarious position especially Germany who rely on Russia for the majority of its gas. In it’s haste to go “green” they decommissioned two nuclear power stations and started buying gas from Russia, now as a knee jerk reaction to the current situation and the realisation that they are compromised are taking steps to reduce their dependency on Russian energy, too little and too late! The sanctions being implemented are not any different to the sanctions that have been in place for some time. The only sanction that is a step further is the use of the swift system. This will impact Russia, however I do believe that Russia has alternative means of doing international business and this will not be as effective as hoped. However, there is a war being waged economically and the Russian economy is under attack, coupled with cyber warfare all these methods can be deemed by Russia as acts of war. In fact Russia has other nations who would be happy to buy their wheat and other commodities; China!
For us here in the UK, we must be careful not to join the war mongering drum beating narrative, desperately trying to emotionally manipulate public opinion into supporting military action by the international community with a no fly zone which would effectively be engaging in kinetic war. This is a regional conflict which I do not believe the UK needs to engage in on any level. We are not dependant on Russian gas comprising only about 4% of our supply, our involvement at this time can only be in response to international allies and has been slow in comparison with other EU nations, also bearing in mind that we are no longer part of the EU. Boris Johnson has blacklisted several Russian Oligarchs.
There is a view that the reason for the reticence of the UK in applying harder sanctions is the significant contributions that some of these billionaires have made to the Conservative Party coffers as well as the financial secrecy services provided by the UK in places such as the Cayman Island and Jersey. The UK is a major actor on the world stage in proving financial secrecy services resulting in an estimate worldwide tax loss of approximately £190bn annually.
I do not know what is going on in Ukraine. I think the bigger question is…if I wanted to get a balanced view…how would I do that? There may be misinformation on both sides…I’d like to hear from both sides and decide for myself. We seem to have moved from censorship of ‘medical and scientific consensus’ to other areas including what’s going on in Ukraine. I have no idea whether Putin is more or less aggressive than we have been in the last two decades.
A humanitarian crisis is unfolding before us following Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine. The risk of a major military conflict is remote but real, and the situation on the ground continues to change. We asked our contributors how they think Putin’s aggression will impact politics and policies in the UK and what if any changes are needed?
“We failed to punish Putin after his illegal annexation of Crimea and Donetz etc. and so he carried on planning (we now know) for the return of the Soviet Union in his name”
Even with hindsight NO ONE could have foreseen Putin’s true, Hitler like, total insanity, cruelty and inhumanity to his fellow man. We failed to punish Putin after his illegal annexation of Crimea and Donetz etc. and so he carried on planning (we now know) for the return of the Soviet Union in his name. The huge numbers of troops/armaments for a country with an economy smaller than Italy’s , on the Ukraine border, should have warned us.
Indeed Merkel and the EU rewarded Putin with massive gas/oil supply contracts and a new pipeline bypassing and weakening Ukraine, straight after the Crimea annexation. Unbelievably the EU buys a third of it’s gas from Putin (and Germany 40%!!). Would you buy from Hitler!? Merkel’s legacy for Germany/Europe is truly appalling and Putin predictably is now cutting supplies of gas to Germany, substantially causing Germany real problems! They and the EU have both enriched Putin and funded his army/missiles.
The sanctions will be very bad for Russia but with unbelievable countries like Pakistan, India and China probably stepping in to fill the gap on energy supplies/revenues – Putin will probably now be able to tough it out.
The UK has not done much wrong because a USA President, severely weakened by his appalling Afghanistan withdrawal fiasco is not going to put troops on the ground and Putin knows that and is counting on it. The UK has led the way even with NATO, but we cannot act by ourselves. Boris has been great! The EU have proved once again, like the Balkan war, to be totally useless – thank God for Brexit so we could take fast, leading, action ourselves!! Though Germany’s huge, about turn on arms expenditure/supply is truly amazing.
With no troops on the ground and no, no fly zone, Putin will just carry on. The problem is – China will be watching the reaction to Putin and may decide soon to annexe Taiwan and the South China Sea islands in similar fashion and with Russian reciprocal support.
The UK cannot do much more as it has already shown real leadership, fast action and back bone, but like many western countries is now going to have to consider spending 3%+ GDP on armaments as Russia/China/Nth Korea can never ever be trusted again. All civilised western countries will have to do the same. Efforts should be made too to get Russia thrown out of the UN Security Council.
The one hope is either the return of James Bond to carry out one last operation on Mr Putin or one of the Russian oligarchs funding a contract on dear Vladimir. Like Hitler, I think Putinism could collapse like a pack of cards if he has gone. Unfortunately crucial action on COP 26 and the world climate change emergency will take a back seat whilst the very future off the free world is at stake.
“If any private individual or group wishes to get involved in the conflict either in person or financially they are more than welcome to do so. The UK is in no position financially or militarily to get involved”
I’m not 100% sure Putin IS the aggressor. He may well be. Regardless, this conflict has nothing to do with the UK. Under no circumstances should the UK government embroil itself, it’s armed forces or people in this situation. If any private individual or group wishes to get involved in the conflict either in person or financially they are more than welcome to do so. The UK is in no position financially or militarily to get involved and would do well to concentrate on the affairs of it’s own household.
War is a racket.
“We need each other, the UK has expertise in the world financial markets, intelligence gathering, the size of our economy, hopefully the EU will start a post Brexit period of Glasnost with us”
Nick Mane, local Brexiteer.
As everyone knows, the war in Ukraine is having seismic repercussion for nation states as well as continents. Some have already been experienced but much will depend on the war’s outcome .
So far, we’ve experienced levels of both national as well as international unity, replacing prevalent and destructive polarities. We need each other, the UK has expertise in the world financial markets, intelligence gathering, the size of our economy, hopefully the EU will start a post Brexit period of Glasnost with us.
Through the EU’s lack of accountability and transparency the EU has been left exposed by placing their energy egg in one unstable basket. The EU’s also under pressure from their need to appease the green movement, no matter what the cost.
Now the EU is stuck in the middle of the twin evils of sourcing energy from a political adversary as well as having a nuclear power plant attacked by an invading army, who could have predicted that?
In a world of growing demands and fewer resources there are only increasing pressures for future conflicts and the existential dangers of excessive nuclear power stations and nuclear warheads. History repeats but gets more extreme and our leaders fail to understand this basic reality.
Hopefully, this catastrophe will point the way to deterring future conflicts through the power of prevention from massive economic and military co-operation, a risk reduction in the pointless numbers of nuclear warheads, produce a more reasoned debate on shared future energy resources and decision making, help persuade both the EU as well as other rogue and unaccountable states for the need to reform and move towards democracy.
The best outcome is for peace to immediately be reinstated in the Ukraine and as a result bring greater peace to everyone, opening up the need for co-operation with neighbours, not ownership of them. If Ukraine falls, nations working together could be more powerful than any war and restore freedom and livelihoods for our friends in the Ukraine.
Either way, everyone benefits from less hostilities from the likes of Macron, Putin and XiPing and more handshakes.
The potential implications for the UK could be less spending on nuclear warheads (more in health, education, law and order), greater international co-operation, more accountable neighbours, a balanced and safer approach to energy and future demands on energy and greater levels of peace.
If not, don’t worry about switching the light bulb off on your way out, we’ll all be toast.
Thanks to all who attended our Hustings last night. A tremendous set of candidates with great ideas for Croydon, further afield and our country. We wish them all well in May.
On Friday 25th February the Local Government Chronicle (LGC) reported that Croydon Council faces “new financial collapse amid concerns it misused £73m”, and may need to issue a new Section 114 notice (de facto bankruptcy) following the 2 issued in 2020.
The borough is seeking approval for £75m in loans covering the existing and next financial year. This follows the towns auditors raising concerns about £73m from the sale of 350 properties, which LGC states that “Auditors have queried the way Croydon categorised that money as a capital receipt and spent it on transformation funding.”
The Chronicle reports “A dispute is understood to be ongoing between the council and its auditors Grant Thornton, which is still yet to sign off on the council’s 2020-21 accounts over the alleged misuse of the £73m”.
If auditors decided these funds should come from the revenue budget this could lead to a new Section 114 notice being issued, and no doubt further bad news for Croydon’s taxpayers.
Following a referendum in October last year, Croydon will have an elected executive Mayor from May. With the issuing of a Section 114 notice (de facto bankruptcy), concerns about planning, and the desolation of the town centre, most people believe Croydon needs change.
Hoping to lead that change is Gavin Palmer, standing as in independent candidate for Mayor.
Gavin thanks for speaking to us.
“born and bred in Croydon from a family with 100 years of Croydon roots”
Can you start by introducing yourself to our readers?
A high achieving intelligent, team builder and talent, born and bred in Croydon from a family with 100 years of Croydon roots. 30 years of battling for good Public Limited Company behaviour as a volunteer, a company Director, father, and husband. Clean, honest as much a possible, straight forward, a talent in causing effective meetings, with a superb analytical mind.
“Cleaning up Croydon Councils contractors, agents, inspectors, and employees behaviour”
Standing for Mayor as in Independent is a bold move, what’s prompted you to stand and what would be your priorities as Mayor?
I applied to become the Conservative candidate but was not allowed an exemption as it was a few days late which I thought was harsh given the Conservatives tend to be a meritocracy.
Why? Because of despair at the callous, insulting treatment of residents disregarding objections or Whitgift estate single dwelling purchase conditions. The bias favouring ugly developments, the ugly politics of bias/attack/disdain/ignoring the Nolan principles and ethical behaviour. The bullying type oath of loyalty behaviour, leaving good candidates deselected, ignored or placed in the wrong areas. I looked around me waiting for someone great to step forward, maybe Chris Philp MP and there seemed to be none to cleanly accept the daunting challenge. As at University when putting myself forward, in Croydon after some years assessing and some summoning up of courage if Croydon was going to be turned around it would be up to me with a massive movement and team.
Priorities are many as Mayor in a disaster bomb site of a town. Cleaning up Croydon Councils contractors, agents, inspectors, and employees behaviour. By bringing in transparency, honesty, direct personal accountability, good selection of and promises from new committee Chairs of planning, licencing and other committees.
Starting of well planned numerous competitions, campaigns and well delegated projects. A reform back to common sense of departmental organisation, sensible accounting, proper planning of projects, internal audit, police investigations, cleaning up the cashbooks, contract openness, hold those liable and criminally responsible as required in court, for the impact they have had in breaching public trust so often.
Boldness. Some new articles to reign in the reckless Brick by Brick Directors. Becoming Mayor of the worst award winning borough (most financially delinquent council in 150 years, worst run in the UK 4 years by Private Eye, worst pollution level, worst council housing, bankrupt probably twice, corrupt devious elected officials, slimy devious PR spin etc.) has many priorities at the same time in addition to bringing in tech jobs, youth behaviour transformation and that depends on telling the truth about the lies, deceit and what’s so. It will be very ugly.
A reminder to all, I am only one man and much responsibility lies in who gets selected and who gets elected as Croydon’s councillors and their actions and behaviour afterwards which needs local people lobbying and meeting their counsellor’s.
“Happier, peaceful, wealthier and healthier. Efficiently well run in every department boringly so, a large number of talented civic duty minded elected councillors”
If you were elected Mayor, how do you hope Croydon would be different at the end of your term of office?
Happier, peaceful, wealthier and healthier. Efficiently well run in every department boringly so, a large number of talented civic duty minded elected councillors as we had pre 1993 committed to doing their best for Croydon and putting Croydon First. More jobs, more beautiful, more attractive, sadly unless the current proposed Local Plan is rejected by 50%+ councillors a rampant reckless 4 years of intended destruction and blame caused by the Labour cabal of cowering sheep like councillors voted because of their party membership, misguided loyalty or friendship rather than on merit. Sacrificing Croydon’s best interests for party nastiness and blaming others.
“So I intend to turn our town around and I am seeking 100+ Croydon Centurion volunteers to do that”
I noticed that the financial city of London was ripping up for asset sales decent engineering businesses rather than growing the businesses and I am committed to the possibility to have Britain and Croydon be great. So I intend to turn our town around and I am seeking 100+ Croydon Centurion volunteers to do that and many more assisting.
If people want to get involved how can they help?
I am committed to having a massive campaigning engagement in person face to face, community building, a great Platinum Jubilee celebration in Croydon, volunteers street by street, old and young, the youth and schools, the churches, the families regardless of political bias to create a better future, clean up atrocious politics and fraud/corruption for Croydon’s many residents and visitors.
I also have a track record of causing good things at University, in life and a few things in government. However I need YOU!
Volunteer now , Make a difference and put Croydon first.
In October 2020 Croydon Council’s external auditor’s Grant Thornton issued a report in the public interest which was a damning indictment of the council’s failings. In January this year Grant Thornton took the almost unprecedented step of issuing another report in the public interest, this time focusing on the refurbishment of the Fairfield Halls.
At 32 pages long, the report goes in to significant details of the £67.5 million pound refurbishment of the arts venue by Croydon’s found property developers Brick by Brick, set against an original £30 million budget.
We bring you some of the low lights of the report below:
“The legal advice showed that if the land transfer option was properly implemented, it was possible to avoid any public procurement process, although it highlighted risks. In our view these risks were significant. The key to avoiding a public procurement process, it was said was that there was no positive obligation on Brick by Brick to do the works”
“Neither the Council nor Brick by Brick have been able to provide a properly executed written conditional sale agreement”
“Neither the Council nor Brick by Brick have been able to provide a properly executed written conditional sale agreement (which would have been in place had Fairfield Halls been transferred to Brick by Brick in line with the land transfer option) or properly executed loan agreements covering the funds provided by the Council. Without properly executed written agreements key elements of the legal advice were not met. Further, it is our view that the Council’s arrangement was at risk of challenge under procurement law as Brick by Brick was given a detailed specification of works (effectively amounting to a positive obligation to carry out the refurbishment) and the Council did not assess whether Brick by Brick was not acting as an independent company, in line with the legal advice”
“In obtaining external legal advice and not fully considering or implementing that advice, it is our view that the Council failed to ensure it was acting lawfully”
“In obtaining external legal advice and not fully considering or implementing that advice, it is our view that the Council failed to ensure it was acting lawfully”
“As the Council was specifying the works it wished to see carried out, and the true objective of the licence was to oblige Brick by Brick to carry out those works, for the benefit of the Council, a public procurement process should have been carried out, and the entry into a licence without one did not reflect this underlying reality and in our view is therefore likely to have been found to have been a breach of public procurement law had it been challenged in court”
“This is a serious concern as to the Council’s financial and corporate management and also calls into question the lawfulness of the Fairfield Halls payments and suggests that the Council has not made proper arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources”
“The June 2016 Cabinet decision referred to a £30 million investment in the project; we have found that the final expenditure on the project was £67.5 million”
“The Scrutiny and Overview Committee (the Committee) was active in attempting to scrutinize the project, its progress and related costs. Reports presented to the Committee, in our view, did not highlight the known increase in costs. Financial position of the project The June 2016 Cabinet decision referred to a £30 million investment in the project; we have found that the final expenditure on the project was £67.5 million. Despite the June 2016 Cabinet report referring to a financial appraisal, the Council has been unable to provide any such financial appraisal without which we are unable to conclude whether the project additional spend in excess of the budget was caused by inadequacies in the original budget setting or in controlling costs or in changes in the scope of the work during the project. With no subsequent Cabinet decision recorded on the project budget we consider the original Cabinet-approved budget to be £30 million”
“The approval decision in June 2016 was for a £30 million project to be completed by June 2018. In October 2018 the tolerance of a £50,000 / 0.1% of the project budget overspend (as reported to the Growth Board) and delayed project into a future financial year had been significantly breached. It is not clear whether the significant additional spend was escalated to an officer led leadership team or via another Council process. In our view, the then Executive Director of Place, as Chair of the Growth Board, had a responsibility to escalate a reported spend in excess of budget of £15.89 million to a formal Cabinet. We have been unable to identify any evidence of the escalating risks being reported to Cabinet formally”
“It is a serious financial control and legal failing that payments in excess of £60 million were made to a third party without sufficient clarity as to the powers relied upon or any properly executed written contracts”
“It is a serious financial control and legal failing that payments in excess of £60 million were made to a third party without sufficient clarity as to the powers relied upon or any properly executed written contracts. Both the then Monitoring Officer and the then section 151 officer had a responsibility to ensure that the legal loan agreements were properly executed prior to making payments. In our view, officers treated Brick by Brick as an extended department of the Council in terms of the financial payments made, and did not ensure the level of rigour we would have expected”
A full timeline is set out in the report. Highlighted below is how according to the council reporting in a period of 14 months, £25million was added to cost of the refurbishment.