Zachary Stiling – Croydon Constitutionalists

Wet summer, whilst Europe burns. Is it weather or is it climate change? – Your Views (Part 2)

In the UK we’ve faced a wet summer, whilst we’ve been told Europe burns. Are we being told the truth? Are these problems man-made or due to climate change? If climate change, what if anything should we do about it?

We asked our contributors for their views.

Back to Part 1 ¦ On to Part 3

Zack Stiling, political activist.

“Parts of Europe may have had an uncommonly hot summer, but to frame that as part of a climate ‘emergency’ is completely disingenuous”

As ever, the narrative we are fed from politicians and the mainstream media consists of a load of half-truths presented in a way which is designed to mislead. Parts of Europe may have had an uncommonly hot summer, but to frame that as part of a climate ‘emergency’ is completely disingenuous, and to attribute it to the wildfires is spurious in the extreme.

Everyone knows that the ignition point of paper is 451 degrees Fahrenheit. For wood, grass and all similar substances, it is generally between 450 and 500 degrees, so there is no way a temperature of 120 degrees – the hottest ever recorded in Europe – can cause the spontaneous combustion of grassland or scrub. In all cases, the wildfires could not have been started without the heat being magnified in some way or, as is more likely, an external heat source being applied. In short, the wildfires will have been started by human activity, deliberately or by accident, and not as a result of climate change.

Dry grass obviously makes the fires easier to spread, but that is caused more by prolonged dry spells than a few days of high temperatures, and is a normal characteristic of the summer climate which doesn’t usually result in a mass panic. Most, if not all, of the fires could have been avoided if people used their brains and took appropriate care.

“Croydon’s name means ‘Valley of the Crocus’, commemorating its Roman use as a centre for saffron production. If the temperature gets warm enough, we could revive that industry”

The climate, of course, is permanently in a state of flux, and will warm up and cool down over periods of centuries as it always does. The only thing for us to do as adapt to it, as humans in times past did by wearing fur and hides to keep the cold out, or taking advantage of the warm summers to grow apricots, musk melons and figs, as we did in Tudor times. As friends of the Croydon Constitutionalists will know, Croydon’s name means ‘Valley of the Crocus’, commemorating its Roman use as a centre for saffron production. If the temperature gets warm enough, we could revive that industry.

“We do not need to take heed of the agenda-driven zealots who tell us we should all become miserable vegans and have our energy consumption monitored”

Post-Industrial Revolution, the scope for mankind to overcome and adapt to obstacles has never been greater. There will always be options, and it is up for us to try them, reject them or improve them as we see fit. We do not need to take heed of the agenda-driven zealots who tell us we should all become miserable vegans and have our energy consumption monitored. As a case in point, a carbon-neutral synthetic fuel has recently been developed for internal combustion engines – no thanks to politicians, prophets of doom and their electric-car fixation – and works interchangeably with petrol, making the 2030 ban on petrol and diesel vehicles look pretty stupid.

Scott Neville, Hampshire Independents

“The south of Europe has always been hot, if the Mediterranean Sea were to be dammed in the straits of Gibraltar it would dry up as more water evaporates out of the sea than flows into it from the rivers of Europe/Africa”

There is a lot of things to unpack there. The first thing to remember is that the media is not there to tell you the facts, they are there to sell you the news, so there is always going to be some blurring of the truth to make it more marketable. So has the UK summer been wet…. yes, but it’s not been wet by biblical proportions and the UK has a long history of rubbish weather and it raining more than we want, ok sure its rained a lot more than we would want, but I don’t think this is anything that exceptional. I don’t really think there is anything special about the weather in the UK other than “it’s been a bit wetter than usual”.

Europe is a little different, so you ask, “are these problems man-made or due to climate change?” I would say, yes and yes. The south of Europe has always been hot, if the Mediterranean Sea were to be dammed in the straits of Gibraltar it would dry up as more water evaporates out of the sea than flows into it from the rivers of Europe/Africa. Given the longest river in the world connects to it, that tells you a LOT of water evaporates. So, it’s pretty hot there and always has been. So, the man-made bit. Historically a lot of farming has been conducted by small scale family farms in the south of Europe, they have had small fields which are well suited to the hilly terrain. This kind of landscape is far less suited to large scale farming. Now the EU really hates small scale farmers, they would much rather have big industrial farmers. Over the years a lot of these small-scale farmers have been put out of business and the big industrial ones have taken over some of the land. This is a critical change, because the fires while in part might be caused by slightly hotter temperatures, they are mostly caused by an abundance of fuel on the ground in these now abandoned fields.

“which makes no sense when you consider the religious cult of “The Science” where is totally acceptable to abuse people in the street for contradicting the first slightly official looking thing you found on Google”

We have seen this many times in other countries like Australia where the indigenous people would burn the land regularly to remove the excess fuel. For some reason we hold a certain arrogance over such things now, where our leaders have decided these people don’t know what they are doing because their actions have not been derived through the scientific method (which makes no sense when you consider the religious cult of “The Science” where is totally acceptable to abuse people in the street for contradicting the first slightly official looking thing you found on Google and academics like Peter Boghossian have shown deep flaws in the peer review process in some fields).

Now, I am all for the scientific method, both my degrees (BSc – Hons – 1st & MSc – Distinction) are in Science, so I am well signed up to the Scientific method (I don’t like to brag about my education, because you should judge me on the quality of my research / arguments / findings, but it was more to show that I am not some fly-by-night that looked up the definition of science yesterday, I have devoted my life to it). I really don’t agree with the modern fad of “there are other ways of knowing” and “my truth”, there is only the truth and the only way of knowing for sure is empirical evidence which is falsifiable. However, these old cultures and people have survived for a reason, so while burning the land or small-scale farming might be done to appease some god (which I don’t accept), there might be some valid practical reason for these practices evolving. Another example might be the rules in religious texts, like thou shalt not kill, I don’t believe any god said that (because I don’t believe they exist), but I do think that’s a pretty sensible rule to produce a functioning society, i.e. the reasoning is wrong, but the outcome is sound. One obvious outcome is that these practices produce a stable environment from which humans can flourish. While I would always doubt the reasoning, I am very open to the idea that there is good reason for doing these things and sure we can change what we do, that’s fine, but let’s be pretty sure about the consequences before doing that. In essence the fires in Europe are very much man made.

Climate change, yes the climate is changing, and yes its getting hotter, that is not going to help, one thing I have learned is that Earth has a lot of reinforcing feedback loops which is counterintuitive. For example, in an ice age its colder, colder means more snow, snow is very good at reflecting heat back into space, therefore it gets colder. The same could be true here, more heat, stuff burns more easily therefore more heat. It’s interesting that the planet does always appear to have some method of correcting itself (although we don’t really understand why, and life does play a part in that so past performance is not a guide to future returns blah blah).

“Firstly, get the plastic junk out of the seas. The seas are one of the most important regulators of our climate, they are the origins of all live on earth and produce vast quantities of food, why, why, why, are we ok with all this plastic being dumped in there?”

In terms of climate change, I think there are some important things we can (and should do as quickly as possible). Firstly, get the plastic junk out of the seas. The seas are one of the most important regulators of our climate, they are the origins of all live on earth and produce vast quantities of food, why, why, why, are we ok with all this plastic being dumped in there? We need to get all that plastic junk out and stop putting any more of it in (which includes things like shipping recycling to China where it can fall off the sides of boats). We should think a bit more carefully about what we eat too. All the arguments I see make absolutely no sense, the better thing for the climate is to eat avocados shipped in from South America rather than meat from a farm I could walk to. What? This makes no sense. We should try to eat more locally grown produce as its generally better for us, uses less energy and animals have a higher welfare standard. Now I realize that not everyone can afford that, so I don’t complain about people buying cheap food I know plenty of people can’t afford anything else, but those that can afford, in my view should (although I have no right to force them).

The final thing I think we should all do is use less energy, not in some “you will own nothing and be happy” way, but because it just makes sense, if you don’t need the lights on, turn them off, it will save you some money. Insulated homes are cheaper to heat. We are going to have a few years with power cuts over winter thanks to our inept government not planning our energy security properly and building new power plants (Nick Clegg, “it will take a decade to build a new nuclear power plant, so we won’t do that” in 2010…. well would have been pretty handy now in 2023). Using as little energy as possible will help reduce your own costs and help mitigate the supply problems. Further to this the energy we have on earth is finite and controlled by the Sun (other than nuclear, though that’s still finite), at some point in our distance future humans will need to leave Earth and find a new home, I imagine that will need quite a lot of energy, so let’s not squander it all now on lighting up the outside wall of our house at night.

Scott can be emailed at [email protected] and is on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/ScottNevilleIndLib. The Hampshire Independents are online at https://hantsind.com/ and on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/hampshireindependents.

Back to Part 1 ¦ On to Part 3

Photo by USGS on Unsplash

ULEZ Extension

Listen to our conversation with Zachary Stiling of the Heritage Party discussing the extension of the Ultra Low Emission Zone to Outer London and how this could affect places like Croydon. (9 minutes)

Podcast Episode 78 – Zachary Stiling: Tory Sinking Ship, 3rd Time Lucky For Croydon & World Cup Wokery

We are joined by Zachary Stiling, a local Heritage Party activist and previous Council candidate in Croydon, as we discuss the news that various Conservative MPs have announced that they are standing down at the next General Election and we bemoan the fact that Croydon Council has declared bankruptcy for the 3rd time. We also chat about the wokery and hypocrisy engulfing the FIFA World Cup.

Spreaker

iTunes

Google Podcasts

Podchaser

Podcast Addict

Deezer

Spotify

Stitcher

Castbox

Amazon

Beauty

My tuppenceworth speech by Zachary Stiling

“I propose, from observation, that beauty is an objective truth. Those of us with notions of beauty will agree on what is beautiful. Sunsets, fertile valleys, swallows in flight—who will refute it?”

In post-Renaissance Europe, there can be no excuse for ugliness, and yet it abounds. Some people see no problem; many things which are ugly happen to be cheap and convenient, and perversely popular. This points to one thing: that some people are not receptive to beauty.

It does not point towards one of the most irritating, hackneyed and untruthful phrases in circulation: that ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’, which implies subjectivity. I propose, from observation, that beauty is an objective truth. Those of us with notions of beauty will agree on what is beautiful. Sunsets, fertile valleys, swallows in flight—who will refute it? If the matter was subjective, would someone not wish to assert that the warm glow of dusk is an aesthetic abomination?

We may quibble over minutiae because beauty is metaphysical, its laws written not in numbers as the language of physics, but perceived through feeling rather than deciphered through equations. But as it exists objectively, we perceive it in broadly the same way.

I now speak only for myself, but as one who feels exalted by beauty, you may imagine how the opposite effect is induced by its absence. A while ago, standing on the platform of East Croydon station, it occurred to me that I could see nothing beautiful, and it occasioned a sadness which was profound enough to be memorable.

“Edridge Road, off the Croydon Flyover. Face south and bask in a sense of homeliness as you look past the modest Victorian bricks and mortar to the spire of St. Peter’s Church. Then have your cosy contentment shattered as you about-turn 180 degrees”

Take also the example of Edridge Road, off the Croydon Flyover. Face south and bask in a sense of homeliness as you look past the modest Victorian bricks and mortar to the spire of St. Peter’s Church. Then have your cosy contentment shattered as you about-turn 180 degrees and look north to the hard, jackbooted tower blocks of the town centre, mocking you with their indomitable girth.

But I am fortunate. I am not entirely cut off from beauty as long so long as I live in leafy suburbia and travel the country for work. Consider the person raised on an inadequate housing estate, forced to drive every day along an anonymous dual carriageway to work in a post-war town centre designed by accountants. What nourishment does their soul get? What lifts their minds higher?

“far from being elitist, anyone may be touched by beauty, and its benefits are limitless. It gives the aimless aspiration, brings joy to the depressed and is something to he who has nothing”

It is common today that certain egalitarians should denigrate true beauty as elitist, because it takes time, money and effort to create, and some people have little aptitude for it. But far from being elitist, anyone may be touched by beauty, and its benefits are limitless. It gives the aimless aspiration, brings joy to the depressed and is something to he who has nothing.

Let us reject the weasel words which justify bad art and architecture — ‘innovative’, ‘diverse’, ‘inclusive’, ‘subversive’, ‘empowering’ and ‘progressive’ — and make planning authorities, developers, the Arts Council and other organisations responsible for the physical and cultural landscape work towards a beautiful world, for everyone’s sake.

How can we ensure there is never another lockdown?

My tuppenceworth speech by Zachary Stiling

“We cannot expect anything good to come from a Chamber stuffed with the scientifically, historically and economically illiterate, or a load of self-serving sociopaths”

There is only one course of action – to totally and utterly reform the government, clearing out every amoral politician and stringently regulating future elections to ensure only those who are demonstrably learned, wise and possessed of a genuine concern for the welfare of individuals are able to enter Parliament. We cannot expect anything good to come from a Chamber stuffed with the scientifically, historically and economically illiterate, or a load of self-serving sociopaths.

Ordinary people have two ways of influencing government policy, persuasion, and force, and both were tried and failed. Scientists and medical professionals, business owners, religious leaders and philosophers all made well-substantiated rational arguments to no avail. Protests were a display of force but achieved little. To dissent was to be ridiculed or suppressed, or even criminalised and brutalised by police.

“The underlying fact is that lockdown is a form of tyranny and must be treated as such”

The underlying fact is that lockdown is a form of tyranny and must be treated as such. Past tyrannies have only fallen with the help of external powers. The Nazi tyranny ended after a war in which millions died. The Soviet tyranny collapsed through weakened governance which Western efforts worked to undermine. The Chinese Communist tyranny has never collapsed because nobody has stood up to China.

Of course, overthrowing the status quo and completely starting again is pure fantasy; it isn’t workable, so I will alter the question because there can be no guarantee against future lockdowns, and instead ask: what should we do in the event of another?

The first thing is to defy it entirely, and maintain normality as far as we are able, hardening ourselves against the threats from government and the frowns of fuzzy-brained neighbours. We must forge connections with those who are of a like mind for the sake of mutual support.

“our next imperative is to become evangelists. We will be mistreated by the media and censored on line, so commence pamphleteering and try to bring one person to reason at a time. It worked well for Martin Luther and Thomas Paine”

If we can thus sustain ourselves, our next imperative is to become evangelists. We will be mistreated by the media and censored on line, so commence pamphleteering and try to bring one person to reason at a time. It worked well for Martin Luther and Thomas Paine. A child will consent to being locked down in his bedroom to avoid the bogeyman until, daring to step outside and goad it, he discovers it does not exist. In the same way, it must take courage and reason to expose the fearful superstition on which lockdowns depend.

Image from https://pixabay.com/illustrations/soil-health-mask-protection-corona-5935148/

My Tuppenceworth 2nd August – Speeches and Photos.

Our second My Tuppenceworth turned out to be another great free speech event. We had 8 speeches on the night from 5 speakers, each followed by a lively Q&A. Where people have shared their speeches, we have published and linked to them below.

The first half of the evening was on the topic of “How do we ensure there is never another lockdown?”. The following people spoke on the subject:

Mike Swadling – speech
Cllr. George Pender
Zack Stiling – speech

Our freestyle speakers and speeches were:

Hilary Judge, spoke on: Social Housing.
Phil, spoke on: Climate change real but net zero not the answer.
Cllr. George Pender, spoke on: Mass Surveillance and CCTV cameras in the UK.
Zack Stiling, spoke on: Beauty in Society & buildings.
Mike Swadling, spoke on: Hey Croydon Council, leave my town alone.

Photos from the evening:

European Court of Human Rights – Your views, Part 3

The European Court of Human Rights intervened to stop the deportation flight of asylum seekers to Rwanda. The UK is a member of the Council of Europe and a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights.

We asked your views on: How should the government react to the ruling by the ECHR?

Back to Part 2 | On to Part 4

Maureen Martin of the Christian Peoples Alliance.

“The desire for a better life is not a valid reason to illegally enter a nation and expect to be welcomed with open arms. They must go through the process legally”

This is the now very familiar battle between the rule of law and woke social justice or asylum seekers versus economic migrants. Nations without controlled, patrolled and hard boarders are not sovereign nations at all but merely what the USA calls sanctuaries for whosoever. The UK government has a responsibility to its legal citizens to ensure they carefully vet whom we allow into this country, this process must be governed by the rule of law and not fuzzy feelings of social justice policies, otherwise known as the European Court of Human Rights.

The ECHR is making rulings based upon individual appeals and of course as they are all in basically the same predicament the court has ruled similarly in each case. For one of these individuals the argument is being made that he was seeking a better life in the UK and would still be vulnerable in Rwanda. If the vulnerability of the individual is the issue, would he be vulnerable wherever he settled? What makes Rwanda a dangerous place for him? This is not clear. In addition to which seeking a better life makes him an economic migrant and not eligible for asylum seeker status. This must be addressed as the cry of human rights activists seems to focus on this point; it is not humane to deny someone the chance of a better life. The answer to that is if a better life is the goal, then the rule of law must be adhered to. The desire for a better life is not a valid reason to illegally enter a nation and expect to be welcomed with open arms. They must go through the process legally.

The UK government should pursue its mandate to protect our boarders and enforce its immigration laws and policies. The message must be sent to other nations, human traffickers, and drug smugglers that the UK is not open for illegal immigration business. If they know that asylum seekers will be sent to another closer/bordering nation it will deter those considering making the trip across the Chanel risking their lives in the process.

We have to look no further than the USA to ascertain that such policies are extremely effective. During the Trump administration the Stay in Mexico Policy was instrumental in controlling the Southern border with amazing results. The current administration has rolled out the welcome mat for whosoever resulting in record illegal immigration numbers, the highest in 97 years. We do not want the same in the UK.

Zack Stiling of the Heritage Party.

“it refuses to recognize the merit in deterring would-be asylum seekers from making the dangerous journeys across the English Channel”

The interference of the European Court of Human Rights in the deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda is disgraceful, but sadly predictable. I strongly doubt that any flights will ever go ahead, because the E.C.H.R. is unlikely to relent and I do not believe the Johnson administration really cares about cracking down on illegal immigration. Having mixed a preposterous cocktail of socialism, totalitarianism and spectacular economic cretinism during its first 2½ years, who can honestly expect the Johnson government to successfully implement a genuinely conservative policy?

Through its decision to suspend the flights, the E.C.H.R. has given up the pretence of existing to protect human rights and quite openly revealed its politicized agenda. The deportations do not contravene any part of the European Convention on Human Rights and yet the Court is happy to remain silent when serious contraventions do occur in Europe (the Convention is supposed to guarantee the right to personal liberty, freedom of expression and freedom of association, all of which are disregarded by so-called public health measures and the criminalization of ‘hate speech’). All migrants do, of course, have a right to live in Britain provided they follow the correct legal procedures and satisfy at least the same criteria as are required of all native-born British citizens.

The E.C.H.R. would appear to prefer the policy mooted in May of destroying a Yorkshire village by filling it with 1500 asylum seekers, at enormous cost to the British taxpayer. By the same margin, it refuses to recognize the merit in deterring would-be asylum seekers from making the dangerous journeys across the English Channel which have already resulted in dozens of them perishing. Perhaps the E.C.H.R. prefers them dead, or maybe it just thinks British resources should be stretched even further by having coastguards posted on 24-hour dinghy-watch.

An important distinction which must be made is that the right to life is the right not to be killed, not an entitlement to be spoon-fed by Nanny Taxpayer. If we presume that the E.C.H.R. would rather claim the latter (and we must presume much, for it is being so suspiciously cagey), we can be certain that it has abandoned any interest it may have had in protecting actual human rights in favour of trying to impose costly and community-destroying socialism on countries within its jurisdiction. To suggest that working taxpayers who are struggling to make ends meet and young workers with no hope of ever buying a house should have money taken from them and given to people with no entitlement to British residence is much worse than crassly insulting.

As with the E.U., we again find ourselves being coerced into acting against our own interests by an unelected body. The best thing the government can possibly do is withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights. As nice as it is to have such a convention, which looks on the surface to be so righteous and upstanding, its value is nil when existing clauses are ignored and non-existent ones are fabricated and used against us. Britain would be much better off with her own intelligently drafted human rights constitution.

Cllr Mary Lawes, The Foundation Party, Folkestone Town Council.

“We campaigned and won the right to be a sovereign nation. We must leave the ECHR and bring in a UK owned ‘Bill of Rights’”

Decisions taken by a foreign body on UK & it’s citizens, must be stopped at all costs.

When the rights of foreigners come before the country’s own citizens it’s time to leave. This is something that should have been done at the same time as leaving the EU. We campaigned and won the right to be a sovereign nation. We must leave the ECHR and bring in a UK owned ‘Bill of Rights’. This must be agreed by the people of this country not Parliament.

If in many years to come this country can sustain taking in large numbers of economic migrants, then great. However, the infrastructure is not in place for its own people never mind those illegally entering the UK. The country also needs to reduce the amount of work visa being issued to many countries around the world. 1,000,000 foreign nationals came to the UK on work Visa’s last year during Covid 19.

I, as a local Councillor see local people having to go back home to parents with their families in overcrowded housing condition. Families being separated and moved to other parts of the country. If you have a partner and cannot prove how long you have lived together you cannot live with them if the Council is helping them out.

In my local town there are no private properties available to rent as London Boroughs send those on their waiting lists to us and other towns. London Borough’s pay large deposits to landlords and agents to guarantee those on their waiting lists above locals. No social housing is being built even though there is such a huge need.

We have insufficient medical services, too few GP’s, patients unable to see a GP, too few beds in ICU units, overcrowded A&E departments.

Schools are overcrowded and having to spend time teaching foreign children English. Children leaving primary and secondary school illiterate. Insufficient vocational education, too many children being pushed for academic education. Pushing vast numbers to university instead of training for future carpenters, electricians, bricklayers, engineers, or plumbers.

If the country continues the way it is going, we will end up with most of the country’s citizens getting poorer with no housing, no education, mental health continuing to rocket. People dying as they would be unable to get any medical care.

People calling for more migrants to come, pushing wages down while trying to fight for better wages and conditions for those already here, is perverse. Businesses looking for cheap labour and rubbing their hands together. Let’s look after our own first and when we have improved our infrastructure and helped all our own then by all means put infrastructure in place and bring in those in need at an agreed number.

This whole of Parliament has for the last 6 years been pitting people against each other on all these matters. We need to have a grown-up conversation about this country going forward but this useless Parliament are incapable of doing so.

The people are the masters not the servants – we are stronger together.

Back to Part 2 | On to Part 4

Image: details, original, amended.

Zachary Stiling, Heritage Party candidate Selsdon and Addington Village.

Zack spoke at our hustings in March, and has been active in local politics since standing for the Heritage Party in Kenley, Zack also appeared on our Pubcast in April last year.

A life long Croydon resident Zack is standing Selsdon and Addington Village ward in May’s local elections.

Zack thank-you for your time.

“As its name suggests, it exists to protect and promote our country’s history and culture, as well as defending other fundamental components of a healthy society, such as individual liberties and the traditional nuclear family”

Tell us a bit about yourself and your party?

I have lived all my life in Croydon’s suburbs and have come to harbour some considerable affection for the borough. Although some parts of Croydon have their problems, and it seems to be suffering more and more each day from inappropriate and unsympathetic development, it has a proud history and still retains a lot of fine architecture and, at the fringes, natural beauty. I am very keen to celebrate and promote these aspects of Croydon.

The Heritage Party was founded in 2020 to rectify the absence of traditional conservatism in our political system. As its name suggests, it exists to protect and promote our country’s history and culture, as well as defending other fundamental components of a healthy society, such as individual liberties and the traditional nuclear family. In particular, we are staunchly opposed to the tide of ‘cancel culture’ and discriminatory identity politics which pose a threat to free speech and equality of opportunity.

Roger / *St Mary’s Church, Addington* / CC BY-SA 2.0

“there is an abundance of green space, including Addington Park and Threehalfpenny Wood, sections of the London Loop and the Vanguard Way leading to the North Downs, plus the wonderful ornamental gardens of Heathfield, another historic house.
Unfortunately, all this is ever under threat. Croydon Council is considering building on a number of the borough’s green spaces”

You’re standing in Selsdon and Addington Village ward, can you introduce the ward to us and what you can bring to the area?

Selsdon and Addington Village is a charming part of Croydon close to its rural fringe, where pleasant suburbia mingles with Green Belt land. Addington in particular is one of the most historic parts of Croydon and one of the last reminders that much of what is now the London Borough of Croydon was once open countryside, although it arguably suffers slightly from its proximity to what Clough Williams Ellis termed ‘the Octopus’ of London’s sprawling conurbations.

Highlights of the ward’s rich history include Addington Palace, a splendid 18th-century Palladian mansion which once served as the country home to the Archbishops of Canterbury, and the ancient St. Mary’s Church, which has one of the finest churchyards in all Croydon and contributes to Addington’s feel of a rural parish. For walkers, there is an abundance of green space, including Addington Park and Threehalfpenny Wood, sections of the London Loop and the Vanguard Way leading to the North Downs, plus the wonderful ornamental gardens of Heathfield, another historic house.

Unfortunately, all this is ever under threat. Croydon Council is considering building on a number of the borough’s green spaces. Although nowhere in the ward appears to be threatened at present, the council has been eyeing up open land in New Addington and near Lloyd Park. If there were to be any development on these sites, apart from it being a terrible loss for biodiversity and our natural landscape, it would lead to an increase in traffic which would directly impact residents in Selsdon and Addington Village, especially since Addington Road already suffers so badly from congestion at peak times. I will not stand for any attempts to build on greenfield sites and will oppose every such application.

I am happy to consider developments on brownfield sites provided they do not involve the destruction of any historic or otherwise significant buildings, and provided the new buildings meet the very highest standards of construction and aesthetics. As a case in point, I would work to overturn the decision to permit the demolition and redevelopment of the wonderful Art Déco Selsdon Garage. This building, although an eyesore all the while it remains unoccupied and derelict, once looked superb and is of enormous local significance for its unusual and exciting Modernist design. The community would suffer a great loss if it were to be replaced with mundane, generic rabbit hutches, but I would strongly encourage its refurbishment as two to four maisonettes preserving the original structure.

I consider myself a supporter of the arts – that is, fine art, music, literature and theatre – and I believe every resident of Selsdon and Addington Village should have access to culture. To that end, I will ensure that Croydon’s libraries remain open and will defend Selsdon Library against any plans the council may conceive to close it. I would also like to make the most of the council-owned Heathfield House, which in recent years has been well used by the Croydon Ecology Centre charity, but which Croydon Council last year suggested could be sold as part of a ‘series of proposed asset disposals’. The house formerly belonged to Raymond Riesco, who was known for his important collection of artworks and antiques which he bequeathed to the council (but which they partially sold in 2013). While ensuring the Ecology Centre retains its rights to the building, I should also be keen to see parts of it opened up to the public as a historic house, with the remaining items of the Riesco Collection put on display for the education and enjoyment of the public. This would, of course, bring visitors to Croydon and encourage spending in the local area.

Presumably Croydon Council had something different in mind in 2020 when it began the process of licensing Addington Park for music festivals, similar to one staged in Lloyd Park in 2019. Anyone who had the misfortune of witnessing the Lloyd Park event will recall that it was not so much a celebration of culture as an antisocial Bacchanalian orgy of intoxicated cretinism. That such an event should happen anywhere is embarrassing; that it should take place in a residential area is unacceptable. Selsdon and Addington Village deserves better, and I will make sure it gets it.

“Perhaps the one thing that unites everyone across the borough is their anger and frustration at Croydon Council’s unrelenting financial irresponsibility. While 28 council employees were earning over £100,000, residents have been missing out on waste collections”

More widely what would you like to see change at Croydon Council and across the borough?

Perhaps the one thing that unites everyone across the borough is their anger and frustration at Croydon Council’s unrelenting financial irresponsibility. While 28 council employees were earning over £100,000, residents have been missing out on waste collections because the council went bankrupt and remains in a precarious situation even after a £120 million taxpayer-funded bailout.

You might think the council would have turned over a new leaf, but it has not. It has yet to scrap Brick by Brick, its good-for-nothing, loss-making property firm with a curious aversion to social housing, and it has recently announced the roll-out of so-called ‘Smart’ bus shelters, which are made by an American company and require a constant energy supply to fund their internet connection and garish LED lighting. They also have sinister overtones because they will all have cameras connected to the internet. Whatever was wrong with analogue bus shelters? I will save money and protect residents’ right to anonymity in public by opposing this development.

My love of natural beauty will, of course, be applied to green spaces all over the borough. In particular, I will support Chris Philp MP and others in their bid to have the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty extended to include Farthing Downs, Happy Valley, Riddlesdown and Coulsdon Common, thereby providing them with further protection against the threat of development. I should even like to go further and extend the designation to Croham Hurst and the Addington Hills.

I would also like to see money saved by scrapping Croydon Council’s equality and diversity strategy, and ending its support for divisive and politically-charged non-events such as black and LGBT+ history months (October and February to you and I). When the council runs a programme ‘the aim of which is to increase the number of BAME managers in the council’, we realise that ‘equality’ refers to equality of representation rather than equality of opportunity. This is unfair, discriminatory and precisely the opposite of what Martin Luther King campaigned for when he said “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will be judged not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character”.

Finally, when Croydon’s finances are secure, I should like to make a statement of local pride. As an antidote to the onslaught of fanatical iconoclasm masquerading as social justice which began with the illegal vandalism of Bristol’s Edward Colston statue, I should like the council to affirm that it loves its town and its history and erecting a statue would be a good way to do that. I’m not an advocate of making statues for statues’ sake, but I would be in favour of anything which enhances the town centre, performs an educational function and gives recognition to a worthy individual. Croydon has produced many great individuals who merit commemoration, composer Samuel Coleridge-Taylor being a particularly well-known and deserving example.

How can people find out more or get in touch if they want to get involved?

I would be glad to answer enquiries sent to [email protected]. Anyone interested in finding out more about the Heritage Party should visit heritageparty.org.

You can read more from Zack’s hustings Q&A in Kenley and hear more about the Heritage Parties ideas from our interview with party leader David Kurten.

Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine: Your views – Part 4

Picture: Every Night for Ukraine 022 Russian Embassy Finland. Author: rajatonvimma /// VJ Group Random Doctors

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?

Back to Part 3 | On to Part 5

“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”

Harley Dalton, Steward of the Independents for Liberty.

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”

Mary Laws, Councillor, The Foundation Party.

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”

Chris Mendes, Leader, The Foundation Party.

The following is an extract from an article by Chris at https://foundationparty.uk/blog/punishing-the-russian-people-and-standing-with-ukraine-are-not-the-same-thing/.

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.

Back to Part 3 | On to Part 5