Wednesday, 15 July 2009

Today Europe, Tomorrow Oblivion!

The mainstream media's made a bit of a fuss today about Nasty Nick Griffin taking his seat in the European Clown Parliament. Certainly his loyal followers who worked almost as hard to get him there as the media will have been celebrating:

But so what? Personally, I'm not going to lose any sleep over the fact that the North West is now partly "represented" in the clown parliament by this fascist knuckle dragger. What's he going to do, set up the Fourth Reich almost single-handed? Even if he had a majority of MEPs instead of just one, he still wouldn't have the ability to do any real harm. The European Parliament is almost powerless and only exists to provide a democratic veneer to the bureacratic swamp that is the European Union.

The only practical result of Nutty Nick becoming an MEP is that he's not going to be showing his face much in Britain for the next few years, which is OK by me (and probably with his rivals in the BNP). Instead he'll be alternating between Brussells and Strasbourg, pretending to be a serious politician and no doubt taking the opportunity to stuff his pockets with whatever expenses and other goodies are available. Let him strut around pretending he actually is someone in the fantasy parliament - personally I prefer to stick to real politics in the real world.

In ten years time, will anyone even remember Nick Griffin?

Tuesday, 14 July 2009

IanPJ speech to Parliamentary Conference on Global Economic meltdown

As Leader of the Libertarian Party UK, I had the pleasure yesterday (Monday 13th July) to spend the day at Westminster, attending as a speaker the Parliamentary Conference on Global Financial and Economic Meltdown.
This lively event, hosted by Lord Tarsem King of West Bromwich was held in Committee rooms 3 and 4a in the House of Lords, and was organised jointly by Global Vision 2000 and the Universal Peace Federation UK.
There were a variety of speakers at this conference, including:
Dr.Nafeez Ahmed : Director, Institute for Policy Research and Development
Anne Belsey: Monetary Reform Party                                                                                
Canon Peter Challen:Chairman, Christian Council for Monetary Justice                                                                                       
Kelvin Hopkins MP - Labour, Luton North
Ian Parker-Joseph   Leader,  Libertarian Party
Daud Pidcock: Global Vision 2000                                                           
David Triggs: Coalition for Economic Justice & Executive Chair, Henry George Foundation
Dr.Adrian Wrigley Systemic Fiscal Reform Group     
The full text of the 10 minute speech given by myself is below, although much of the presentation was interspersed with ad hoc examples and comments,
the Monetary Reform solution was presented in the Q&A session due to time constraints.
At no time in history has any individual had such a wealth of information at their fingertips.  With this in mind, you would think it would be easy to take the pulse of the global economy but at no time in history has the global economy been so rich, varied, and rapid.
Business systems of increasing complexity govern our lives in ways the classic economists could never have envisaged.  Entire industries collapse without anything tangible ever disrupting supply chains and nations fall bankrupt on the "market confidence" of Wall Street traders.  We live in a world of inconceivable numbers and we live in blissful ignorance of business and financial practices we never knew existed… until they go spectacularly wrong.
No government can ever control an economy.  All those who have sought to do so have destroyed it.  One can only manage ones' responses to events in it.  While we may like to gear our economy in a certain way, our economies do not run in isolation of each other. Thanks to globalisation and the internet we are inextricably linked and we cannot pretend otherwise. Which is why the proposals that I will put forward later will cover both domestic and international economics.
As world leaders try to move us ever closer towards international  regulations and international bodies of control, there is only one constant. 
Systems of whatever type, inevitably fail… be they computer systems, regulatory systems or currency systems. This presents the immediate reality that if we use only one system then when it fails, we all fail. And we all fail at the same time.
Undeterred by this reality it has not prevented our leaders from seeking to standardise, make uniform and equalise our systems.  But each society has its own unique perspectives and interests, any such common systems require either a democracy bypass or compromise which fundamentally weakens the basis of the system.  In global banking we have seen both. 
We have also witnessed institutional schizophrenia whereby one regulator does not know what the other is doing or even what it is for, and our  politicians do not know the extent of their powers or to whom the real power belongs.
What we saw last year was the culmination of national, regional and global government intervening in things they do not understand and cannot control. 
The oft quoted cause of this crisis is "irresponsible lending" and "excessive risk" by "greedy bankers".  But that is only half way to the truth. 
The credit crunch is a failure of global regulation as a tool, leading to the construction of castles on a foundation of jelly, such international regulation is now wholly discredited.
Risk is its own regulator when governments do not seek to meddle, and had we retained control of our own regulation, the crisis here need not have hit us as hard as it did.

We are all aware of the disposal of the assets that US banks were legally obliged to create under the Community Reinvestment Act, creating loans worth more than their balance sheets. This put a direct freeze on interbank lending. This subsequent freeze in capital flow sent shockwaves through the markets resulting in instant paralysis.
Subsequently we were forced by circumstance to take a leap of faith that bailouts would restore market confidence and jumpstart interbank lending.  Whether or not this has worked is, frankly, anyone's guess.
There are conflicting signal signs and while there may be room for optimism we have been warned by the IMF this week that Britain cannot afford another bailout, which may yet be necessary. Among all the talk of "green shoots of recovery" the fear is that we will enter a double dip recession.  The contraction of the job market further could lead to bigger credit defaults, not least on credit card debt which is now outstripping our GDP.
Our present administration has taken it upon itself to bailout everything that so much as squeaks. This is a path to economic suicide. 
Even if such measures worked, this is all a sticking plaster at best. Present policy is predicated on the idea that a debt based economy is sustainable and desirable. It is not. UK Plc needs to be producing and exporting, earning money from overseas.
The Domestic Economy needs to be stimulated from the bottom up not the top down. Economies are sustained by the ability of the purchasing public to earn, save and spend, consuming the products that the factories produce.
There is little point in bailing out a failing car manufacturer to see them make cars that they cannot sell.
Put simply it is not capitalism that has failed, it is creditism. Capitalism was designed to work on capital, but it has been distorted and altered to rely on credit, spend now pay later.
It is that this debt based economic model that has now found its way into every layer of society from consumer, retailer, producer to government, all totally reliant upon credit, is the primary reason why a single system failure, in this case interbank lending, stopped everything dead in its tracks.
Having sold off our gold reserves, raided our pension funds  and squandered the money, there was nothing to fall back on, and we have allowed the backbone of the country, the wealth creators, the small to medium enterprise to be drowned in a sea of compliance, regulation and taxes which are crippling our ability to compete, and consequently we have a shrinking productive sector in a country that is spending ever more.
Nations, markets and individuals are stronger through diversity than homogenised cultures, regulatory systems and governments.With this in mind we must reform to ensure our money is real and that our future is built on more than just an I.O.U note to the world bank.
Real Money, not borrowings, is the core of the economy. It belongs to those to earn and spend it, the wealth creators, not merely to those who currently create money or manage it.
But that is only a beginning.
Total Reform of the monetary system, I propose Three planks – Sterling, Sovereign and Free Banking
Firstly, we will return the sovereignty of our national currency—pounds Sterling—to the Crown, removing the privilege of creating money from the private banking industry, with new Sterling being created, debt-free, by the government, and thence spent into the broader economy. The amount of Sterling in circulation will be prevented from being expanded through FRB, stopping bank generated inflationary spirals developing, and keeping the value of your savings safe.
Secondly, we will create a new currency, pounds Sovereign, to be 100% backed by gold. Still vital for international trade, a gold-backed currency will be immensely strong, and help protect the UK from the storms and squalls that sometimes rip through international markets. This kind of currency will also attract investment from overseas into the UK.
Thirdly, allow for the creation of free banks. Free Banks would be completely free of any government interference or regulation. If these prove popular with the market—the citizens of our nation—they will grow and prosper, choosing to embrace FRB if it wished with their own currencies (HSBC peso or Natwest dollars) possibly supplanting Sterling as the primary means of exchange on a day-to-day basis. However, and should they fail, such failure will not impact on anyone who chooses to keep their banking facilities purely denominated in pounds Sterling. In this way a genuine free market in banking will be able to be tried, without the risks being spread over the general population, or the nation as a whole.
I believe that the proposals outlined above are sound and necessary. Our existing banking system has been creaking from one crisis to the next over many years, and has only remained unchallenged because of the enormous influence that those who most benefit from it—the private bankers—wield over our elected politicians.
I am happy that some of the Libertarian Party policies outlined in our manifesto ( are beginning to find traction in Westminster, and that my contribution reaffirmed the consensus view with those voices who shared this platform with me yesterday.

Sunday, 12 July 2009

The Elephant in the Armoured Personnel Carrier

Just as a complete ignorance of economics is practically a requirement for anyone appearing on British TV or Radio News, there is one thesis on armed conflict between states that will never even get a mention on the mainstream media.

That thesis was outlined in a pamphlet called "War Is A Racket". It was written by US Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler before the outbreak of World War Two.

Apparently, John Humphries hasn't read "War is a Racket". Neither has Jeremy Paxman. Actually, no-one on TV or Radio is willing to ask about the "Elephant in the Armoured Personnel Carrier". I wonder why?

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows. How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Do "our boys" need some new expensive kit? To fight the terrorists and keep the world safe for democracy so that Afghan girls can go to school? Money is no object. Hang the cost. Sacrifices must be made. Shut up and keep paying!

Friday, 10 July 2009

Crumbs From Our Masters' Table

The Manchester Evening News reports that Manchester City Council are considering giving a one-off “handout” of fifty pounds to each householder in the city, supposedly in order to help people cope with the effects of the recession. This “handout” should really be referred to as a “handback”, since the money was originally extorted from the taxpayers – if this payment materialises at all, it won't be coming out of the councillors' pockets, it will simply be the return of a very small amount of our own money. It seems that this idea was originated by the “Liberal” Democrats and that their spiritual brothers in the Labour group have agreed to consider it – no doubt both parties believe that this gimick will buy them a few extra votes in the local elections next year.

The MEN goes on to report that the council underspent by 6.8 million pounds last year, and that the current low interest rates mean that the council's debt repayments have been dramatically reduced. That sounds like good news – so why did Council Tax go up again this year? Manchester's sky-high Council Tax is a major burden on the working poor in this town, especially those who are in debt and whose job prospects are uncertain – a large proportion of the population, in other words. Council Tax is an extremely unjust tax that has no relation to the individual's ability to pay, and therefore a Libertarian government would replace it with a tax on luxury goods. Obviously local councils have no power to do that, but the first priority of any responsible local politician should be to keep the burden of taxation to the absolute minimum necessary, consistent with keeping the council's core functions properly funded. Unfortunately, the Establishment parties think of your money as being theirs to spend as they choose. Like oldtime feudal lords, they'll throw some alms back to the poor and hope you don't notice that one of the reasons you are poor is the crushing burden of taxation that they impose on you.

The Libertarian Party recognises that your money is yours by right – it's what you've worked for, and the council has no right to take more than it needs. When the Libertarian Party has its own elected councillors, they will work to ensure that Council Tax is kept as low as it can be – frozen at least, reduced if possible. That one simple act of stealing a bit less money from the taxpayers is the best thing that the council can do to help the honest working people of Manchester.

Tuesday, 7 July 2009

Press Release 7th July 2009


Libertarian Party fields
youngest ever parliamentary candidate
at Norwich North

Thomas Burridge, aged 18, is the Libertarian Party candidate for the upcoming Norwich North by-election, and is set to make history as the youngest person ever to contest a Westminster seat. Thomas was accepted offically by the Returning Officer today.

Thomas is aware that his age may raise a few eyebrows. “People may ask what can I possibly know about anything at my age? Well, one thing I do know is that Labour excesses have left my generation with a massive debt that will take generations to pay off.” “It’s all the more painful because we were not given any say in the decisions that have forced us to spend the rest of our lives in debt.”

“Currently, the Tories and Labour are squabbling about cutting state spending by a pathetic 5 per cent. Whereas, the Libertarian Party want to scrap the whole rotten system. A system that has given us high personal taxes, squalid services and a corrupt parliament.” “I may not win this time, but I will be back in five years, and in another five years, if necessary. By which time, the guilty ones will be wallowing in their generous pensions – while my generation – The Debt Generation – will still be paying back the money that was squandered.”

The Libertarian Party believes in individual liberty, personal responsibility and freedom from government. Its most prominent policy is to scrap income tax, and transfer taxes to non-essential goods, leaving items such as food, heating and rent tax-free.


For more information, or to arrange an interview, contact the Libertarian Party Norwich North Campaign Office on 01603 850573 or the media enquiries mobile on 07505 228618.

Further details are available on our campaign website:
Alternatively, visit the Libertarian Party website:

Thursday, 2 July 2009

Our First Candidate For Parliament

Following on from our recent campaign in Wisbech South, the Libertarian Party has put up its first candidate for Parliament, in the Norwich North by-election, to be held on 23 July. This is a major step forward for the Libertarian Party, and will give us more experience of running an election campaign prior to the General Election and next year's locals. The following was posted on the East Anglian Libertarians blog:

The battle lines are drawn in the Norwich North by-election fight to nab the seat left empty by Labour’s Ian Gibson, who was forced to resign over the MPs expenses scandal.

The odds-on favourite to win the hotly-contested seat, which will be fought on July 23rd, is 27-year-old Conservative Chloe Smith, who has fierce ambition for a career in politics written all over her (this isn’t a good thing, in case you were wondering).

The hapless Labour candidate, Chris Ostrowski, a member of Labour’s Christian Socialist movement (Christ, not more Christians), isn’t considered to have a hope in hell - even Gordon Brown is tetchily refusing to discuss his chances.

David Cameron, who has visited Norwich North twice to support Chloe Smith, thinks his party has the contest in the bag.

Well, I wouldn’t be so sure, Dave...

The Libertarians have come to town in the form of 18-year-old Thomas Burridge. He vows to make Chloe Smith and her brand of career Conservatism "history."

OK. He might not do it this time round. But the likes of Chloe Smith, who represent the "old guard" of professional politicians, will go the way of the dinosaurs one day (arguably in less than a decade).


Because no substance, image-only politicians like Chloe Smith (and her puppet master David Cameron) are NOT relevant to Britain’s society today. They are not interested in life experience. All they are after is a career in politics.

In other words, they have their sights on YOUR (tax) money. Yes, they might do a token job of cleaning up MPs expenses. But make no mistake, professional politicians like Chloe Smith and David Cameron will find a way of getting their "squeaky clean" mits on your tax dollars (I’d should have said pounds, but it never sounds as good).

Why are the Libertarians any different?

Because Libertarians do not believe in career politics. Nor do they believe in big, bloated government - local or national. They believe in low taxes and freedom of the individual to live his or her life as they choose, so long as it does not harm others in any way.

What’s more, Libertarians encourage self-reliance and entrepreneurship. Unlike the Tories and Labour, they don’t maintain a welfare system that makes if more lucrative for a million or more people to languish on incapacity benefits, rather than gain the self-respect of earning money through a job or by being self-employed.

But wait, the Norwich North Libertarian candidate is only 18...

You could argue that a kid of 18 hasn’t got any life experience. And you’d have a fair point. But if you bear in mind that 1 million 18-24 year olds in Britain have no training and no jobs, you could argue that Thomas Burridge is a valid spokesperson for his generation - unlike the Tory Cloe Smith who, as I’ve said, is merely looking to feather her nest as a professional politician.

Ian Parker-Joseph, leader of the Libertarian Party UK, puts it this way:

"One of the things that has been made clear, especially by the younger members of our party, is that the so called ’experts’, the ’professional politicians’ and the older generations have seriously let them down, left them with debts that they will probably never be able to repay and they are mightily hacked off about it.
"They now want their say, in the places that matter, in those places where the decisions are made, and Thomas is one such young man, who having now completed his exams in political studies is ready to stand up and be counted.
"It comes down to the old adage, If you keep voting the same, you will continue to get the same. So it is time for new, fresh faces with fresh ideas to come forward to keep these older politicians on their toes, to start putting forward policies that put the people first, that honestly take care of our rights, liberties and freedoms that the older generations of politicians have eroded, and are continuing to undermine and erode."

Lastly, all I can say is: Don’t vote for career politicians like Chloe Smith, they’ll only rip you off for yet more taxes (the Tories aren’t really the party of low taxes, any more than Labour is).

Instead, vote Libertarian. Vote for individual freedom. Be all that you can be.


Posted by Jimmy Lee Shreeve

And here's a statement from the man himself:

My name is Thomas Burridge and I am eighteen waiting to go to University, I am the Libertarian Party Candidate for Norwich North.

Most sensible people will be saying what the hell does he know about anything- This is what I do know the last twelve years of Labour has left my generation in massive debt, my generation will be paying off the excesses of the last twelve years for the rest of our lives,
not only my generation, by our as yet unborn children. Did we have any say in spending the rest of our lives in debt ? No we did not.

Currently the Tories and Labour are arguing about cutting a pifling 5% of our current bloated State spending. The LPUK are talking about scrapping the whole rotten system, that has given us high personal taxes, squalid services, a corrupt Parliament and starting again.

I may not win this time, but I will be back in five years, and in another five years and in another five years, by the then guilty ones will still be wallowing in their pensions or will be long dead, but the debt will be there.

I am from the Debt Generation only the LPUK has fresh answers from a new Generation.

Of course Thomas is only the first of many Libertarians who will be standing for Parliament in the near future, as well as local councils. More volunteers are putting themselves forward for the selection process all the time. But electioneering costs money, and we're not one of the big Establishment parties, backed by shadowy businessmen with deep pockets. What money we have is freely donated by ordinary people. We need more of everything, more members, more activists, more candidates and more money.

So if you believe in what we believe, if you want the government to keep its nose out of your business and its hands out of your pockets, join us.

Failing that, bung us some money.

Or, in the true spirit of capitalism, buy stuff from us.

The money will be put to good use fighting against the corrupt political class and restoring this country to its classical liberal roots.

And if you happen to live in Norwich North, don't forget to vote for Thomas Burridge, your Libertarian candidate - and a vote for the Libertarian Party is a vote for yourself.