Kevin Butcher of Hampshire Fire Brigade - PC Prig or Anti-English Bigot?

Here we go again. Auntie Beeb has just reported this:

A fire service has banned crews from flying England flags during the World Cup because it is afraid they could offend other nationalities.

Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service said the ban has been imposed out of fear that St George's Crosses on the engines could upset some communities.

Fire boss Kevin Butcher said that the fire service had a responsibility to be "inclusive of all nationalities".

But crews said the service had gone too far because of political correctness.

Jim Buck, crew manager at Gosport fire station, said: "I do not think the public would have a problem with the flags as we just want to support our country in the World Cup."

Mr Butcher, who is the brigade's head of operational delivery, sent a memo to all stations in Hampshire advising crews of the ban.

Just who is Kevin Butcher really? A PC prig? An anti-English bigot? For heaven's sake, the Cross of St George has been flying at 10, Downing Street during the World Cup. It is the national flag of England. Is Mr Butcher really telling us that people who choose to live in this country are offended by its national flag and want us to give it up?

The flag is deemed OK to fly above 10 Downing Street, but not on Hampshire fire engines.

Just what IS your game, Mr Butcher?

Update...

I look to John at the England Project as a bit of a voice of sanity when I get stirred up about things, and he has written to Hampshire fire brigade and received this reply. I'm not totally convinced as it does not explain why Kevin Butcher said that the fire service had a duty to be "inclusive of all nationalities" (and therefore not fly England's flag!). But even if this is a whitewash job on the part of the fire service, it's better to offer this reason than to leave Mr Butcher's statement hanging in the air.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Lib Dem Simon Hughes Says... Or Should That Be "Dictates"?

Simon Hughes - in the running for my Creep of the Week Award...

Responding to the House of Commons Scottish Affairs Select Committee report into the 'West Lothian' question, Liberal Democrat Shadow Constitutional Affairs Secretary, Simon Hughes said:

"Liberal Democrats agree that devolution so far is work in progress and unfinished business. Much greater power to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland has been part of our campaign for years. However, we must now concentrate on handing down power to people in England as well. The new constitutional settlement must work not just for England, but the whole of the UK.

"The break-up of the UK is out of the question. By next year we will come forward with proposals for serious devolution in England. There is also a strong case for parliamentary constituencies across the UK mainland to have the same population. We will not let this issue go away."

Oh Simon - why bother stating that the new constitution "must work not just for England but for the whole of the UK"? So far, devolution has persistently worked against England and your party has been quite happy to let it. All we seek is parity with Scotland! Why keep sucking up to those who already have a much better deal elsewhere in the UK? Why not a bit of outrage about the democratic deficit currently levelled against the 50 million people in England?

Why was "much greater power" for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland part of your party's campaign "for years", and England left by the wayside? Why wasn't parity for the UK nations Lib Dem devolution policy from the start? It only is now because the English electorate is starting to question the situation.

So your party's proposals for "serious devolution" in England will be with us "by next year"? Why's that, then? All we need is an English Parliament. Parity with Scotland. Perhaps independence. Perhaps a federal UK.

And the "break up of the UK is out of the question"? Why? Because Simon says? Because the Liberal Democrats say? It's good to know that everything is open to debate in these post-democratic times, and that the electorate is in the driving seat.


This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Tony "I'm Very English - Here's My Cup To Prove It" Blair Comes Unstuck...

"Why aye man, first class gadgie, that's me. And I'd thank you not to make me choke on ma wee cuppa, Ms. Petch. Och, see you?!"

It was all going so well. Here was our dear PM, Tony "Scotland is a proud, historic nation" Blair, as guest of honour on a BBC Radio Five Live football phone-in. Our Great Leader was merrily spouting a load of crap for the not-exactly-intellectual folk who were allowed through the BBC barbed wire barricades.

Then, suddenly, CEP member Della Petch managed to duck under the search beams and ask a proper question... More here...


This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Beware Propaganda: We Never Had To Reclaim The Cross Of St George...

I have read a couple of articles recently stating that in the 1990s the English began to reclaim the Cross of St George from the far right. Well, I have a couple of points to make...

1) The Cross of St George was never a symbol of racist groups. I don't even think you could buy that flag in this country. The idea is simply propaganda issued by the Chattering Classes and the New Labour loyals. The racist groups identified with Britain and the Union flag. That flag was the only national flag I ever saw in England in the 1970s and 1980s. And as for the 1960s, take a look at photographs of the country celebrating the 1966 World Cup win. The Union flag was THE flag in England.

2) The return of the St George's flag in the 1990s was simply due to its usage by the national football team, not symptomatic of any "healthier sense of English nationalism" or "reclaiming" of the flag from racist groups. Even if the CoSG had ever actually been the sole preserve of racists, the notion that anything so interesting as its wresting from their evil talons occurred in the smug 1990s is ridiculous. That decade thought itself wonderful without ever lifting a finger to be so - simply because it wasn't the 1980s.

3) After its re-emergence as a sporting emblem, the CoSG became more and more prevalent and more and more relevant as Blair and co discriminated against England at every opportunity, and began the process of dismantling the country into unelected regional assemblies.

And the flag's return all started with the beautiful game. Footie has done us a great favour.

Come on, England. Both on and OFF the pitch.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

England Under Threat...

Click on image for larger view.

Everybody that can possibly make it to this meeting please contact Stephen Gash.

For all those that can't, please check out the CEP and English Democrats sites.

Don't just fly the Cross of St George for the football. By the time the next World Cup rolls round, there probably won't be an England - we must act NOW to protect the interests of every English citizen.

It doesn't matter who you are, nor how far back you can trace your various family branches in England. Pre-1066? Post 1066? 1986? 2006? Who cares! "English" is a nationality, not a race and everybody living here permanently is entitled to be English.

This is a call to everybody.

Please get involved.

For democracy's sake.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

The England Flag To Be Flown At Downing Street...

What do you know? Apparently, Tony Blair has backtracked and the Cross of St George is to fly from 10 Downing Street when England is playing in the World Cup.

Well, I'm stunned!

I was going to write in my last article on the subject: If Blair ever agrees to the flying of the Cross of St George for any reason, I'll eat the underpants I'm wearing at that moment.

So glad I didn't.

Thanks to Tommy English for pointing the way to this article by Boris Johnson in the Telegraph, too.

Interesting times.

There's just one thing: win, lose or draw, whatever the outcome of the World Cup for England, the people of this country must continue to campaign for England afterwards.

To campaign for a fair settlement now that democratic devolution has been granted to Wales and Scotland.

England, it must be remembered, has, by contrast, been chopped up into unelected regional assemblies.

We must all campaign for our own national parliament to represent us, the people of England.

Like dear old Scotland.

If not, the abolition of England via New Labour dictate lies just around the corner.

Our ambulance services have been regionalised.

Next our police forces will be.

Then our county councils will be abolished.

Over 1,000 years of history will be abolished as our counties cease to exist.

"She's a lassie from Lancashire"?

Not any more.

In England's place will be nine EU regions, bordering on the far better financed and democratically represented "proud, historic nations" of Scotland and Wales.

This is truth and it's going to happen if the people of England decide to put England to the backs of their minds until the next World Cup.

Don't let it.

There's much more to England than just a football team.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Why Tony Blair won't fly England's flag...

According to Tony Blair's spokesperson, he will not be following UK Culture Minister Tessa Jowell's lead in flying the England flag from his car because of his "particular circumstances".

What are these? Is it because he's Scottish? (yes, he is - you can't deny it!).

Is it because he's PM of the whole of the so-called "UK"? If so, as he's declared his own country, Scotland, a "proud, historic nation," and given it its own parliament, and Wales its own assembly, both with First Ministers avidly supporting those countries' sports teams, the least Blair could do is fill in here and fly the flag for the England.

But no. Obviously, consideration for his own country, as always, comes first. No matter that he's already given Scotland its own parliament and Scots MPs are dictating government policy in England. Blair knows that a minority of his fellow country people will be outraged if he flies England's flag and he doesn't want to upset his own.

And he has no loyalty to us.

Blair won't even wave a little flag for England. Underneath it, lies hatred and contempt for our country. We need our own First Minister. Our own parliament.

The break-up of England, entirely undemocratic "regionalisation" of this country, lies just round the coorner if we're left in the hands of the Nu Labour Project.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

PC Trendy Janet Street-Porter, Anglophobe Yasmin Alibhai-Brown and the joys of "Desmond's"...

I have just seen a video of the comedy series, Desmond's, which first hit our screens in January 1989. Ah, nostalgia! I enjoyed this series, which ran until the mid-1990s, the first time round.

Depicting life at a Peckham barber shop run by a West Indian family, headed by Desmond Ambrose and his wife Shirley, and with a predominately black cast, Desmond's spoke of cultural differences not just between black and white characters, but also amongst the blacks only. However, the black and white clasped hands in the opening titles spoke of a greater unity.

In one episode, Shirley's sister, on a visit from the West Indies, questioned Desmond's desire to retire home. He ate fish and chips! Hadn't he became rather "English" (note: not "British"). Desmond's English-born son rapped about being the best - because he came from Peckham!

Desmond's was funny, but often thought provoking. It didn't shy away from issues like racism. But at the back of it was a sense of optimism - of people being people. Of hope.

Compare that to nowadays, with New Labour and its assorted politically correct morons doing all they can to destroy unity with their "multicultural" claptrap. Yes, we must respect each others' cultures, but you cannot have various groups living in a vacuum. There has to be integration too. And why does the indigenous culture of England have to be denigrated by the PC crowd at every opportunity? Morris dancing? "oh dear," (sneer); fish 'n' chips? "I prefer a curry," (sneer) - and so on.

What is it with the PC crowd? We know some PC folk are members of the Scottish Raj, so their stance is self-explanatory. But what about the likes of Janet Street Porter? What motivates her to infer that people flying the St George's flag are oiks? Rank snobbery? Surely not left-over Imperialist guilt? The Empire was British and its flag was the Union flag!

Trevor Phillips, of the Commission for Racial Equality, spoke out a couple of years ago, claiming that the concept of multiculturalism had not worked and was now a thing of the past. The government, terrified at the prospect of any increased unity in England, quickly announced that changes may be made to the CRE.

This was a thinly veiled threat, effectively silencing the organisation, and turning it into a another government propaganda agency, squeaking "Britishness!" or "Multiculturalism!" at every opportunity.

Mr Phillips, who a few years ago described himself as a black Englishman, proud to wear a rose on St George's Day, does not speak out like that nowadays.

Meanwhile, New Labour encourages Scottish and Welsh culture and discriminates against England at every opportunity.

Yes, if you live in England you will endure lower public spending than in Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales.

Yes, if you live in England, Tony Blair will appoint people to key English ministries who are not democratically accountable to you.

Yes, if you live in England, New Labour will carve up your country into non-democratic Regional Assemblies, despite the massive "NO" vote in the North East, the only area of the country allowed a referendum. The government will also, for good measure, regionalise your ambulance services and police forces, making both into much larger, distant and more unaccountable services. You won't be consulted, either. You will be fed a load of nonsense that the police forces must regionalise because of the threat of terrorism. But in Scotland police forces are becoming smaller. Surely, we shouldn't be leaving Scotland open to the threat of terrorism?

Or is the "terrorism" claim just another load of clap trap, to force us to have what we do not want at the behest of the Scottish Raj currently ruling England?

If you live in England, New Labour will allow Scottish MPs to overturn the votes of your MPs (as with foundation hospitals and top-up fees) and force legislation on you.

It seems to me that the politically correct ramblings of the likes of Janet Street-Porter, Vince Cable and resident Anglophobe Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, are simply designed to cloud the issues and create hatred and division. Alibhai-Brown is particularly vehement, having elected herself as spokesperson for immigrants to this country. She goes around claiming that they are more comfortable with a "British" than an "English" nationality tag, and slagging England and the English off at every opportunity.

We're to blame for everything - the British Empire, the lot. Alibhai Brown's knowledge of our history is of bog standard, it would seem. She comes across as opinionated but uninformed. An anti-English bigot, in fact. She never attacks the Scottish or Welsh, although the Scots were disproportionately involved in the Empire and a recent BBC show, Scotland's Empire, was certainly no apologists' piece.

Alibhai-Brown hysterically demonises Englishness and England only, because she is a devout coward and knows that the Scottish and Welsh would not tolerate her attacks.

So, no unity for England. And increasingly non-democratic government, too.

Whoever you are, whatever your race, creed or colour, if you are a citizen of England get wise. This abuse by the British state has gone on long enough.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

The Commission for Racial Equality - We Don't Have To Answer Your Questions! We Are Accountable Only To The Nu Labour Project...

I can't fault the promptness of the Commission for Racial Equality in replying to the e-mail that Drew and I sent to them on Saturday, which included a link to this WENAP post. But the content of their reply leaves a lot to be desired.

Thank you for your comments which have been duly noted.

If you require further information or assistance please do not hesitate
to contact us.

Regards,

Information and Assistance Centre

So, why can't people in England be English at the library? Why is the CRE ignoring government discrimination (lower public spending, the West Lothian Question, non-representative MPs etc) against the people of England? Why are inclusive Scottish and Welsh civic identities allowed, but not English?

The CRE does not see fit to answer our questions. What an accountable government lapdog... er, sorry, I mean "body" it is!

Apologies. Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. But I do love it so.


This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

BBC - The Office Site - Scottish and Welsh bias?

Had a very funny e-mail from Dave in Slough last night - all about the BBC's Office website. Remember that show - Ricky Gervais as David Brent, emotionally needy and all-round pain of an office manager, Peter Purves as Peter Purves, star of a cheesy, 1980s training film, and Ben Bradshaw as somebody in the background who once had his trousers removed?

Excellent. Well, Dave thinks that the BBC's website on the Office theme is great, but the featured map is perhaps evidence of Little Scotlanders and Little Walesians on the design team. Why? Because of the Tartan Bitter "Brewed In Scotland" ashtray featured in the smoking room and the empty Welsh water bottle in Dawn's bin at reception shown above.

Dave suggests that it's highly odd that the only two distinctively British products featured on the map are from the "nations" of the "UK". Couldn't there at least have been some indication of the fact that the show was set in England? A faded "Come On England" sticker on Jamie's computer, for instance?

Don't be silly, Dave - this is the BBC!

Hmmm... I'm not absolutely convinced that this particular incident IS evidence of the BBC's Scottish and Welsh bias (which undoubtedly exists), Dave, but then I'm an innocent and trusting soul.

Who knows?

Anyway, thanks for the e-mail.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

The Commission for Racial Equality is Racist!

I am indebted to ELERF for highlighting this article on the Spalding Today site:

'British Other'?... No, I'm English!...

A HOLBEACH woman was outraged after being told she could not call herself English by library workers.

June Booth, whose details have not changed in decades, was asked her ethnic origin when she popped into a Lincolnshire County Council-run library to find out if her card needed renewing.
Having said she was English, Mrs Booth was told she must fit into the category of either "British White" or "British Other". Mrs Booth, of Cedar Drive, said: "I think it's all wrong. I'm not going to have my nationality taken away from me. I don't think it's a small matter - it's being said that there's no England."

When she refused to acknowledge herself as anything other than English, the library worker classed Mrs Booth as "British Other".

She said: "It was ridiculous and embarrassing because other people were there. It seems you can call yourself Scottish, Irish or Welsh but you can't call yourself English. I feel like everything is being taken away from me."

Mrs Booth believes it is something many other people feel strongly about and refuses to allow the matter to be brushed aside.

What really horrifies me is that the article goes on to say that the library form, common to libraries throughout England, uses criteria from the Commission for Racial Equality . Large numbers of people in England consider themselves to be English, but the Commission somehow considers that nationality unfit to be listed. However, the Commission considers "White British" perfectly acceptable. Why should colour come into the equation? Surely that is far more racist than giving all people in England the option of listing themselves as British or English?

Amusingly, the home page of the CRE currently contains a link to a CRE Scotland article (there is no CRE England) on fears that the World Cup could lead to an escalation of anti-English racism. This is ironic, as the CRE routinely practices anti-English racism, as seen in criteria provided for ethnicity listings at libraries across England!

Also on that home page is a link to a completely useless report on how "Britishness" has been portrayed at recent general elections. All this is simply to reinforce the government's brainwashing for the people of England that we must be BRITISH. We must not question devolution. We cannot be English. English is nasty. But the Scottish and Welsh can be Scottish and Welsh.

The Commission for Racial Equality is simply an anti-English government puppet. Much of its current role revolves around supporting the government's unfair devolution settlement, by keeping the people of England divided.

30 years since it was formed, the Commission for Racial Equality is a corrupt department of a corrupt government, dedicated to a racist, elitist cause: the provision of democratic devolution to Scotland and Wales, and the dissolvement of England via regionalisation without consultation.

The effect of this would be: a continuation of lower public spending in England; a continuation of non-representative MPs in key English ministries; a continuation of the West Lothian Question; the possibility of a largely democratically unaccountable Prime Minister in the near future.

The woman who found "English" was not listed as an ethnicity option at her local library and was distressed, matters not a jot. By submerging England and ignoring or demonising the concept of Englishness, the CRE serves the government well. The hope is that, by keeping the concept of "Britain" and "British" to the forefront in England, hopefully not too many people will get wise to this government's dreadful discrimination against every man, woman and child in England.

The corruption of the CRE in its attitude towards England and Englishness is quite a recent thing. A few years, ago Trevor Phillips, the Commission's head, was actually saying how proud he was to be a black Englishman. He was thrilled that it was now accepted to be black and English, and cited an experience he'd had on holiday in France when a Frenchman had referred to him as English. This was featured in the Sun (it may have been the Star or Mirror, but I think not) a few years ago on a St George's Day (I'm almost certain that it was during the Cross of St George frenzy). Sadly, I didn't keep a copy, but anybody who has a Sun newspaper archive should be able to find the article.

Phillips later stated his concern that English children were not fed positive images of themselves compared to the Welsh and Scots. Ominously, the Government then commented that certain changes might be made to the CRE, and from then on the Commission has towed the anti-English line.

The Commission for Racial Equality is an outdated and now highly racist tool of a government determined to prevent an inclusive, English civic identity; determined to prevent the people of England from uniting against the current system of divide, deprive and rule.

Devolution for Scotland and Wales, an undemocratic nightmare for the people of England.

I don't know how CRE staff sleep at night.

Drew and I have e-mailed the CRE, asking for a comment on their anti-English stance. It shall appear on this blog if they condescend to contact us. Why not drop them a line yourself? The E-mail address is info@cre.gov.uk

Oh, and if anybody has a copy of the Trevor Phillips Sun newspaper article, I would really appreciate a scan of it.

Update...

Here's the reply

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

The Battle of Trafalgar Commemorative £5 Coin info: The Royal Mint Joins The Push To Airbrush Englishness Out Of Existence...

As we all know, the great and the good - the Prime Minister, the vast majority of MPs, the Guardian, etc, have all decided that "British" is good, "English" is bad.

Gordon Brown, a man of great ambition, makes an exception for our national football team. But he has his reasons.

Why is "British" good, "English" bad? If anything, doesn't "British" smell of ye olde Empire? That's beside the point, badly thought-out and unfair devolution has made the continuation of a "British" civic identity in England essential to New Labour and the repression of "Englishness" is an absolute must.

In the sales info for the Royal Mint Battle of Trafalgar commemorative coin I received this morning (see above), I read that:

The commemorative Trafalgar £5 coin has been struck at the Royal Mint, as have all British circulation coins for the last 1,100 years.

Er, there was no "British" nation and no "British" national currency 1,100 years ago. Shouldn't the blurb actually read "English and then British circulation coins" or some such?

But no, the Royal Mint has decided to join Tony and his cronies in attempting to airbrush England out of existence. Then. Now. Forever.

The Royal Mint's little effort is part of a much bigger drive aimed at ensuring that every man, woman and child in England will continue to think "British", thus sealing their fate as second class UK citizens.

Wakey, wakey!

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Blackpool Bans England Emblems From Its Taxis, The Scottish Raj Dictates And It's All Our Own Fault...

Interesting mail from a person apparently called "McCisco"...

I reckon you lot are in a hell of state. You're being ruled by a Scottish Raj - and let's not forget the Welsh contribution - Prescott's assemblies and Hain's love of apartheid. You deserve better. 'Course you do. Here's Blair giving you another unaccountable transport minister and putting his old buddy boy John Reid in as Home Secretary... now how many top jobs are occupied by folks from my little Tartan Acre now?

Blackpool council tells its taxi drivers not to fly the national flag of England, nor even wear clothing with the word "England" or the three lions emblem on.

Yeh, you're in a state. And it's Scotland's fault. Wales' fault. You're victims. Helpless victims.

Well, I beg to differ. I'm not excusing my lot (the "jocks") from making hay and abusing the Union left right and centre since 1997. Yeh, we're undemocratic. Yeh, we stink. But the English just sit around, doing nothing about it!

What is it with your MPs that they do bog all to address the situation? Where's the Opposition? What is it with these taxi drivers that they let the local Council tell them that their national emblems are unsuitable? Unfit?

Yeh, we Scots are dictating to you. But the worst culprits in all this are your own upper and middle classes. It's the English class system which causes Blackpool council to wrinkle its nose at the wearing of England emblems by taxi drivers and dictate that they should not do so. The council would only treat forelock-tugging English peasants in this way - no other cultural group in the country would take it. Or be expected to.

From the taxi drivers comes the odd grumble, but they accept what might even be an illegal ruling.

Meanwhile, your MPs sit on their arses, riding the gravy train and not giving a sh** what it's like for you lot down there on doggy-do street.

Since John Major arrived, the electorate in your country has grown more and more indifferent to what its governments do. Insular. Meanwhile, we "Jocks" and your Polly Toynbee and sparkling-EU-career-aspiring type MPs let you fry.

Sure, I accept that Scotland takes some of the blame. But it would never have been allowed to get this far if the English ruling class gave a sh** about its underlings - you know, the people who elected them, and the English peasants kept in touch with events, questioned them and got out there and raged.

It's odd that the government denies English civic institutions and an inclusive English civic identity, as your main man at the CEP blog says. It's odd that Blackpool Council should feed the fear of racism by saying that the England flag is a bad thing, and that is what they are saying with the ban for taxi drivers. But they're only doing it because they can. Because the people won't speak up and say "NO!"

I was reading that it's (apparently) interesting how St George's flags are being flown earlier than ever this World Cup season. Is it to do with a rising sense of injustice at the democratic deficit? No. It's because the English want 1966 all over again. That's all. They don't know or don't care about what's happening politically. And don't blame the media. There's plenty about the issue on the internet if people care to look.

A lot of the fault lies with your own smug, politically correct top brass and the English peasant tendency to tug forelocks and say "aye, sir!"

I'll need to think about all this, but you make some interesting points, McCisco! Thank you.


This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Sainsburys - "Official England Supermarket" and Gigantic Hypocrite

Sainsbury's - "OFFICIAL ENGLAND SUPERMARKET"? What?!

This is one of the "big two" supermarkets (Tesco being the other) which won't even acknowledge England's existence the rest of the time! Remember the Sainsbury's casserole packs - with: "carrots from Lincolnshire, UK; Onions from Lincolnshire, UK; Swede from Fife, Scotland; Turnip from Fife, Scotland..."

Check out how Sainsbury's submerges England as "UK", yet acknowledges Scotland across its various lines. And then tell me how it qualifies to be "official supermarket" of England's national football team?

And as for Tesco - that store will not feature the Cross of St George on English products, but is happily raking in the profits selling St George's flags and other items to cash in on football fever.

I'd actually feel very disloyal to England, buying any football-related merchandise from either Sainsbury's or Tesco.

Both stores are actually England-hating hypocrites.

Think about it. Don't buy.

UPDATE...

England The Land Equal Rights Forgot takes a look at Asda's inspired but completely illogical World Cup money spinner here.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

GMTV Report on Scotland's Lack of Support for the England Football Team...

I was roused from my slumbers this morning by the phone ringing. It was an old pal of mine, reporting that ITV 1's breakfast telly channel GMTV was covering the "issue" of Scotland's lack of support for England in the coming World Cup.

I'm not a great footie fan, and I have enough trouble coping with a bowl of muesli to ever bother with breakfast TV in the morning, but my pal's news interested me. I personally don't think it's at all odd or wrong that most people in Scotland don't support the English football team. Why on earth should they? It's the way many folk north of the border buy the opposing teams' strips I find childish. But, to return to the GMTV report, it seems to me that the media in the past didn't pay much attention to the attitudes of Scots regarding English football. This year seems different. I have read several articles on the subject.

I wonder what it all means?

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Clinging On...

Gareth over at the CEP News Blog points us in the direction of various interesting discussions taking place about devolution across the web, and makes the following point:

Far be it from me to gatecrash the party but surely the only question that needs to be asked is "What do the English want?" Any change in England's constitutional status within the Union should come about through consultation with the people (as it did in Scotland and Wales).

Exactly. The people of England need to be treated in exactly the same way as the people of Scotland, and offered the same options. That is of first importance.

Wales, which was offered a watered-down version of what Scotland now has, deserves nothing less.

THEN we discuss the role of the Union (if any). I'm not anti-Union, in fact I favour a federal UK with domestic parliaments for each nation and a vastly slimmed down UK government taking care of issues like defence. But I don't regard the Union as being essential to life or as more important than one of the UK nations (the country on the sacrificial slab is always England).

Some people on the web seem to cling to the Union like Linus to his security blanket. What is that about? The last vestiges of Imperial pride? Fear? A desire to perpetuate the plight of the people of England as democracy goes down the pan at the behest of a "UK" government?

It has me fogged.


This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Oh Janet Street-Porter - Please Help Me To See The Light...

Just where does Saint Janet of Street-Porter get off? Looks like Horsham, to me...

From 20th Century Words by John Ayto, 1999:

chattering classes n (1985) a social group consisting of articulate members of the educated middle class, typically seen as holding liberal opinions (notably opposition to the Thatcher government of the 1980s) and given to debating social, political or cultural issues amongst themselves. British colloquial, and usually used with dismissive contempt (generally by someone who might him - or herself be regarded as belonging to the group). Reportedly coined by the journalist Frank Johnson in the early 1980s, and popularised by Alan Watkins in the "Observer".

Back in the 1980s, when the "chattering classes" tag was first applied, those lovely people in their cumfie wumfie homes, complete with Betamax or VHS video recorders and some even with microwave ovens (well beyond the pockets of many of us back then), seemed to be on the side of those of us who called ourselves "working class" (quaint, eh?) and viewed ourselves as being victims of Thatcherism.

As well as chuntering on about a load of insignificant crap, those paragons of virtue were anti-Thatcher, anti-capitalism, anti-cutbacks... caring sharing lovelies, many of whom prided themselves on having been teenagers/twenty-somethings in the 1960s. In those days we didn't bother to mention the 1970s - they were far too recent and far too unpleasant to be crowed over at that point.

"Vote Labour, Vote Labour, Vote Labour, Vote shiny new Lib Dems," chanted the chatterers.

Fast forward to now, and we have a New Labour government which has reduced the health service in England to tatters; is planning controversial education reforms; is making our police and emergency services larger and more unaccountable to the localities they serve; is foisting legislation on us via the West Lothian thingie; is under funding England at every opportunity, and imposing undemocratic regional assemblies on us.

New Labour is obviously very different to Old Labour. It doesn't take a clever clogs to see that. So what do the chattering classes say now?

"Vote Labour, Vote Labour, Vote not-so-new-and-shiny Lib Dems!"

Many of their members still pride themselves on having been trendy hipsters in the 1960s, but nowadays many also pride themselves on having been 60s hippie leftovers or retro 1950s Fonzie clones in the 1970s. The 70s have been rewritten - with the aid of the BBC, of course. Auntie's "I Love The 1970s" series took a grim decade, poured in loads of pop culture from the 1960s and 1980s, and made it better.

Whatever their vintage, the chattering classes think they're rather supah.

So, are their voices raised at the democratic deficit suffered by the people of England under this government? No, sadly not. They haven't the insight to adapt to the situation. Many of them remain loyal to Labour, although the Labour Party they first supported has ceased to exist.

But the chattering classes have spotted some new villains to take the place of the Thatcher mob. Yep, it's you there or me here, flying the Cross of St George flag in support of the England football team or in protest at this government's actions against England. The chattering classes just KNOW that we are racist, moronic thugs. Unsavoury blots on the landscape.

So they have adapted to different times. And now look down their noses at us, the great unwashed. Don't try to protest. They know. They are educated people, idealists, liberal thinkers of the first order.

Some of them write newspaper columns.

What do we do, eh?

Them up there, us down here.

I suppose that's progress.

Oh, Janet Street-Porter, I fly the England flag, I want my country to be acknowledged, I want a fair deal for its people. I grovel at your knowledgeable pixie boots for forgiveness. Please explain to me where I am going wrong...

From my viewpoint, the so-called "enlightened" views of you and your ilk, the disparaging comments about "white van man" and the national flag, seem to be powered by nothing more than old fashioned, unenlightened class snobbery...

Now, that surely can't be the case. can it?

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Neil Kinnock On Football: "I Hope You Lose, England!"

Here's Neil Kinnock, a man who feathers his nest from "British" politics. A man who absolutely can't bear England at any cost, it seems.

Remember what he said at the "Values of Britishness" conference in November 2005?

"I am pro-Britain in everything I do. I always support Britain. I support the British Lions on every occasion. I support any and every Welsh team on every occasion. And I support any and every team on every occasion when they are playing against England. "

So, you won't be joining the majority of people in Britain crying "Come on, England!" once the footie starts, eh, Neil? In fact you'll be supporting the opposing teams?

Absolutely charming.

Perhaps it's not so surprising, Mr Kinnock is, after all, Welsh. But did he have to make his smug and unkind declaration at a junket largely paid for by England's tax payers? And did he really think we'd all have forgotten it by the time the footie season loomed again?

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

The Sunday Herald: People In England Who Want Equality And A Return To Democratic Rule Are Anti-Scottish Racists!

The CEP News Blog highlights the latest anti-democratic and anti-English ramblings of the Sunday Herald newspaper, in response to an article in The Economist, highlighting the UK Government's anti-England spending bias.

A quote from the Herald:

Yet countless polls over the years have detected latent resentment at a Scottish “Raj” running English affairs. Like all racism, this has remained latent despite attempts by the Daily Telegraph, Jeremy Paxman and the Campaign for an English Parliament to inflame it. And indeed by The Economist, which portrays Scotland as dependent and parasitical on the UK economy. “Like teenagers on an allowance”, as Grimond describes it. I suppose Scotland’s oil is just pocket money then.

We're racists then, simply for wanting equality? Good grief, I'm half Scottish, half English and I think the current set-up stinks to high heaven.

The Herald's argument is not strong on logic. It's Scotland's oil? But some is in English waters and if they seriously believe that Gordon Brown can rule England, though not democratically accountable, surely they must believe in the concept of "Britain"? So England is "Britain", and it's fine for an MP representing a Scottish constituency to rule it, but the oil is "Scottish"?

Does not compute.

The article also quotes Robert Hazell, Mr "I'm in the Government's pocket" of the Constitution Unit. I've heard more sense from Gilbert the Alien.

I had hoped for an attempt at serious, responsible journalism from the Herald. An attempt by this newspaper to pull itself out of the gutter. It is with great regret that I demote it from fish 'n' chip wrapper to the dustbin.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

The BBC - We Are Not Biased - You Are Silly! It Is Important To Consult Scotland On Everything, Even Things That Don't Affect It...

Oh dear. Recently, this blog and the CEP news blog highlighted the government's latest proposal to cover up the concept of England, thus continuing the devolutionary nightmare of inequality levelled against every man, woman and child in England, by proposing the teaching of "core British values" - but only in schools in England.

Well, the BBC news website saw fit to seek out the views of one David Eaglesham, of the Scottish Secondary Teachers' Association, although Scotland will be unaffected by the proposed legislation. No view was sought from an English teaching association.

It seems that the Beeb was also seeking to paper over the facts of devolution.

Drew wrote an e-mail of complaint and got the following, part evasive nonsense, part pro-forma:

Thank you for your e-mail regarding bbc.co.uk.

I appreciate that you objected to the way in which the story in question allowed a Scottish spokesperson to give his views regarding the Government's proposed citizenship classes in schools. I note that since you felt that since Scotland has a devolved government that this constituted a pro-Scottish bias.

Firstly, I should state that David Eaglesham's comments were only 1/8 of the comments presented on the web page. Part of our role as an impartial observer is to report every side of the argument and in this occasion we felt it was important to discuss the views of a Scottish spokesperson.

Our website editors are charged to ensure that over a reasonable period they reflect the range of significant views, opinions and trends in their subject area. The BBC does not seek to denigrate any view, nor to promote any view. It seeks rather to identify all significant views, and to test them rigorously and fairly on behalf of the audience. Among other evidence, audience research indicates widespread confidence in the impartiality of the BBC's reporting. I recognise, however, that you may not share this view. Therefore, please be assured that your comments on this matter have been registered and added to a daily log that is made available to senior management within the BBC, as well as website editors.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact us with the strength of your concerns.

Paul Hunter,
BBC Information

Firstly, the mailing states that the Beeb felt it was "important" to seek a Scottish viewpoint on this non-Scottish matter. No explanation of why. That seems completely illogical and there is more than a slight display of arrogance in declining to justify the decision.

We'll squander your licence money on what WE deem important. We don't have to explain - that seems to be the attitude.

Secondly, later in the mailing, the BBC refers to "significant views". Significant views usually relate to those held by people affected by an ongoing situation or proposal.

Thirdly - "among other evidence, audience research indicates widespread confidence in the impartiality of the BBC's reporting".

Well, that sounds rather smug - and rather far removed from reality. I hear things to the contrary every week, particularly when it comes to the BBC's covering of matters relating to England and the democratic deficit post-devolution.

There is more than a suggestion that the BBC is above reproach, so it must be Drew's viewpoint that is at fault.

In reality, what sane person would call the BBC impartial? Its PC preaching and distortion of the news, coupled with its refusal to cover the affects of devolution on England, smells like an overloaded dustbin in the summer sun. The briefest inspection would send most people reeling away.

The BBC e-mail is an absolute disgrace, and illustrates just how unaccountable this so called accountable organisation is to the vast majority of people in the UK - the people of England.


This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Joseph Harker, The Guardian: Flying England's National Flag? Go On, Admit It - You're A White, Pot Bellied, White Van Driving Racist...

The Guardian is at it again. Joseph Harker writes...

Is it just me, or is anyone else slightly worried about the number of St George’s flags flying from road vehicles right now?

Well, no. I think it's fun. You don't?

I’ve been looking at the drivers of these flag-waving vehicles, and - OK, I admit this isn’t exactly scientific - half of them are in white vans, and the rest are white, male, tattooed, pot-bellied 35 to 55-years-olds: exactly the type I’ve been seeing on TV for the past month complaining about “our houses going to the asylum seekers”, or that “we’re losing control of our country”. I can’t tell if these drivers come from Barking and Dagenham, where the BNP gained 11 seats, but that borough is just a short drive from where I live, so who knows?

The suggestion is ridiculous, the stereotyping is racist and snobbish and the whole thing is yet another out-of-touch attempt to demonise England's flag by some bigoted, classist idiot sitting smugly up there in Guardian Towers.

Drew, formerly of CEP Cambs and part-time advisor to this blog, wrote to Mr Harker:

Dear Mr Harker,

In answer to your question, I think it is "just you". Pre-1990s, it was hard to buy a St George's flag here and the BNP (BRITISH National Party, not ENGLISH) were mainly waving the Union flag. Do you want that banned?

I do not know a single member of an ethnic minority group who flinches at the sight of England's national flag. There may be a few, certainly people like you encourage it, but the rest is just pure invention on your part.

Post-devolution, we find that there is a heightened awareness of England as a country in its own right. It has certainly got the worst deal from devolution thus far - the lowest public spending, non-democratic regional assemblies, non-representative MPs, etc.

Racism exists, and in large amounts, in Scotland and Wales - and they still wave their flags. Are all, or the vast majority of, flag wavers racists in your opinion? Or does this only apply to ""white van" working class English people?

I have a small St George's flag flying on my house, in protest at New Labour's biased devolution settlement. I am not a racist, but are you saying that if somebody read your article, decided that I was and threw a brick through my window, that action would be justified?

You are the one guilty of stirring up bad feeling.

Your article makes for very unpleasant reading. You make an excellent Guardian contributor, the finest purveyor of priggish, PC nonsense in the UK.

Yours sincerely....

We must all protest at these repeated attempts to demonise our flag. Gruniad writers should stop their priggish and bigoted nonsense, take a look at the issues surrounding uneven devolution in the UK, and start living in the 21st century.

Like Drew, I fly the Cross of St George flag as a protest against this government and its cruel and totally undemocratic actions towards England and ALL its citizens.

The Guardian is apparently a paper which vehemently opposes non-democratic rule.

Well, you fine upstanding, caring Guardian journalists, put up or shut up.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Simon Heffer on England's Democratic Deficit...

Simon Heffer writes in today's Telegraph about the democratic deficit facing England and the government's plans to reorganise the Home Office:

Mr [John] Reid is the MP for Airdrie and Shotts. The people whom he represents in the United Kingdom Parliament will, however, be completely unaffected by any reforms he makes to the criminal justice system or to the police.

This is because those policies are, in Airdrie and Shotts, the preserve of the Scottish Parliament. Mr Reid can therefore act with whatever abandon he chooses as Home Secretary in these respects, and can make whatever hideous errors of policy he likes, in the full knowledge that those on whose votes he depends for his parliamentary career will never suffer one jot because of it.

Accountability, as we understand it, has been shorn from him. He might, for all the comeback any group of English electors - however small - can have towards him have been parachuted in from Burkina Faso or Ultima Thule.

Until some other Labour minister makes a dog's breakfast of his department, and Mr Reid is sent off there with his legendary charm, integrity and intelligence to give it the Glasgow Kiss and sort it out, Mr Reid will be an alien figure, dictating to sanctionless people how they must be regulated in matters of policing and criminal justice.

Mr Brown is the MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath. As he goes about his new mission to reform the Home Office, he might well argue that some of its key responsibilities - such as immigration or the much-hated intention to introduce identity cards - will affect the entire kingdom, and therefore give him the right, as one of the Queen's ministers, to become involved in that area of government.

Equally, the English might argue that, as many of the Home Office's most crucial responsibilities affect only England, it would be nice to have in charge of reforming it someone who in the end will be answerable to English constituents. Instead, they have Mr Brown.

Again, he can act with absolute abandon, knowing that, in the pubs of Kirkcaldy, they will merely be hooting at what he has inflicted on the English, and preparing, as his reward, to vote for him in even larger numbers at the next election.

Why does Blair persist in appointing unaccountable Scots MPs to deal with English business? "This is one United Kingdom," insists No 10. Yes it is. If you ignore devolution. But that is impossible.

No 10 is living in Cloud Cuckooland.

Blair insists he appoints "on merit" - so does an area of the UK with a population smaller than an English county really have such superior MPs, so great that they stand head and shoulders above any in England?

It certainly looks like it.

Or is Blair simply an anti-English/anti-England prig, looking after cronies from his homeland and punishing the electorate in England for giving him such a rough ride at the recent local elections?

Answers on a postcard, please...

Thanks to the Cross of St George Forums and The England Project for pointing the way to the Telegraph article.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

SOS - Democratic Rule Sinking Fast...

What makes the Labour Party think that the English would cheerfully submit themselves to rule by either of these old-school Scottish socialists?

A poll for the BBC at the weekend reported that 52 per cent of us are unwilling to accept a Scottish Prime Minister. The result is unsurprising, given that Labour lost the popular vote in England at the last election.

More and more people are asking why we should be governed by ministers who sit for Scottish constituencies. They shouldn’t be allowed to pass laws affecting only the English, when their writ doesn’t even run in their own backyard, since most powers north of the border have been devolved to the Scottish parliament. And the polls show that most Scots agree with us.

That's Richard Littlejohn writing in the Daily Mail. Andy Simpson must have been having fifty fits.

Richard has often highlighted the democratic deficit facing England in his previous columns and on his Sky News show, Littlejohn.

Thanks, Richard.

We need more like him. And the voices must be raised LOUDER. John Reid is about to force through police mergers in England. You can't vote him out. New Labour is about to destroy our ancient counties. With the amount of gerrymandering they've done, it would be EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to vote them out.

It's time to protest. Write. Wave banners. March. Scream and howl.

For democracy's sake.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

"Core British Values" - But Only In English Schools

There is now a possibility that something called "core British values" might be taught to 11-16 year olds. But only in England. Why only in England? England alone is not Britain. Because the government likes to shove "Britishness" down our throats as it fogs the issues surrounding the unfair devolution settlement, West Lothian Question etc., that's why.

Gordon Brown has been particularly vocal. But there is a man with ambition. He's not about to let a little thing like democracy get in his way.'British' is a very new nationality. It came about at the time of the union of the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland. 

Scotland had just near-bankrupted itself with its Darien colonization attempt, and so joined England to have access to our markets. And was then disproportionately active in the British Empire. Majorly.

And that's when the 'British' nationality was born.

So, what are 'core British values'? Colonization?

And by the way, the Welsh were right in there with the Empire too. And was Wales a peaceful, united little country, before its incorporation into the Kingdom of England? No, it was riven with fierce battles and disputes.

And Celts? A 1707 linguistic label applied to a bunch of languages, not an ethnicity or history. It got romanticised and turned into a major industry and load of exclusive nonsense-pedalling in the centuries following.

To cap it all, Ireland was partitioned by a Welsh Prime Minister, with avid backing of Protestant Scots.

The BBC has run with the 'Core British Values' story, and consulted all sorts of worthies - including David Eaglesham of the SCOTTISH Secondary Teachers' Association. But the legislation won't apply in Scotland. So, why, if seeking irrelevant views, didn't the BBC consult a French or German or Russian or Australian or South African or Hungarian or Italian teaching organisation?

Because the BBC is in the government's pocket and likes to blur the facts of devolution, too.

The BBC's Scottish fixation is getting beyond a joke. Even their complaints department is based in Scotland - so people making points about this matter, and instances of anti-English bias in general, get short shrift, as I and several friends have found to our cost (one friend of mine contacted the Beeb about the lack of a national broadcasting service for England, and was ranted at by a chap called Fraser who stated that the BBC "did not want an England-only service").

Scotland, a country with a smaller population than an English county, let alone one of the undemocratic government regions we've had foisted on us (and which are shortly to replace our ancient counties), is dominating us and our national broadcasting service.

Creepy.

See the Beeb story here.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

The Herald - The Beano of Scottish Newspapers

The Herald is actually The Beano of Scottish newspapers. If you want a giggle, then have a read. It's different from day-to-day, but I've recently enjoyed the ramblings of a correspondent who questioned what mandate Thatcher had to govern the UK pre-devolution, another who believed that Thatcher was PM for 17 years, and another who believed their region... sorry, I mean "nation", was suppressed by England for 300 years.

But recently a Herald article appeared in a slightly different vein, in response to a poll commissioned for the BBC's Politics Show. The question was "Should the UK have a Scottish PM now that Scotland has its own parliament?" and 52% of those polled said no. So, the Herald started wittering on about something called "Scottophobia"...

Today’s Scottophobia also reveals a complete misunderstanding of the devolution settlement. It was intended to strengthen the Union by promoting constitutional diversity. If jealousy and suspicion are as prevalent as they were more than 300 years ago, and these attitudes are held over a wider social base, Britain is not the mature society, at ease with itself, we had hoped was the case.

This, from a country which was over represented in the old UK parliament, and bayed and whined for its own parliament. A country which is now even more over represented, with a Secretary of State at Westminster, MPs voting on UK and English issues AND its own parliament at home. A country whose politicians force through legislation for England, although not democratically accountable. A country which supports any other country against its nearest neighbour and fellow Union member in sporting events.

Very mature, I'm sure.

What disturbs most people in England and Wales about the idea of an MP with a Scottish constituency being UK PM is that a great deal of the legislation passed under his/her government would not apply to his/her own constituents. The whole foundation of democratic government would be compromised to an alarming degree. More than it has been already by the bizarre appointments of various non-democratically accountable health and transport ministers for England over the last few years.

The Herald article is funny - there is nothing more twisted than a bitter Little Scotlander twisting the facts. In fact, there is nobody better at painting themselves and their country as saint, victim or martyr. If it was a national sport, Scotland would be top every time. YOU are at fault. WE are perfect, you get their drift.

But, on the negative side, the article could actually help to stir up ill feeling both sides of the border.

Not that it needs stirring up in Scotland.

Stick to being harmless and funny, Herald.

Or the fish and chips.

UPDATE

An e-mail from Sue Campbell:

I thought that the Herald article was pathetic. The impression it gives is that the Scots are mature and the English are not! The impression it gives is that the English discriminate against the Scots, have done so for centuries, but the Scots have a perfectly reasonable attitude towards the English.

The impression it gives is that the current state of devolution in the UK and the Scottish people in general are beyond reproach.

Like you, Chris, I'm half English, half Scottish and you should hear the way my old dad carries on about the English at times. Despite the fact he married an Englishwoman and lives in England!

And as for devolution thus far being fair!!

My carefully considered opinion on the Herald article?

Laugh?! I nearly passed me ciggies round!

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Citizens of England Stand Up!

This is a non-racist blog. If you are an English citizen, regardless of race, colour or creed, you are welcome here (or if you are not and are simply interested, ditto!), but in this country the word "English", apart from in reference to our language, is often frowned upon. Not as much as ten years ago, but it still is. It's OK to be Scottish and Welsh, but not English. It's OK for Scotland and Wales to have democratic representatation and higher public spending, but not England.

Why? Let's explore the issues...

New Labour makes a great thing of not mentioning England. It wasn't always so. Scottish-born Tony Blair was talking about St George's Day and England in 1997, the year he was elected. He was touting for votes then. But not now. Tony apparently supports our national English sports teams, but witness the message he wrote to the Scottish football team a year or two back - "You deserve to win" and the message he wrote on the England flag during the last World Cup - "Everybody is behind you". One sounds a little more passionate than the other, does it not?

It is implied by New Labour and their politically correct hangers-on that to be English is to be an Imperialist. Why? The Scottish, Welsh and Irish (the whole of Ireland) were equally involved in the British Empire, indeed the Scots were disproportionately involved and the BBC recognised that recently with the show Scotland's Empire. But to say you're English will probably lead to cries of "Jingoist!", "Racist!", "Little Englander!"

What a load of tripe.

In the meantime, Tony Blair, born in Edinburgh, declares Scotland a "proud, historic nation" and gives it its own parliament. Jingoist? With Scotland's Imperialist past, one might be forgiven for thinking so. This man is supposedly a Christian - isn't pride a sin in that religion?

England gets broken up into regions, at the behest of the new Scottish Raj and its Welsh-born performing monkey John Prescott, despite a massive "NO" vote in the North East of the country, the only area allowed a referendum.

England endures lower public spending, via the Barnett Formula, which its creator, Lord Joel Barnett, says is unfair to England. Lord Barnett has further declared that he is "ashamed" that his name is associated with the Formula.

England's population of 50 million people is being dictated to by MPs representing a population of 8 million (Scotland and Wales combined).

The politically correct crowd (largely composed of comfortably off, white people) fully believe that England owes the world something. They sit up there in their ivory towers, whilst the government destroys our schools, police forces and health service, our traditions, our counties - the very essence of England.

Resident Anglophobes like Yasmin Alibhai Brown are a rarity but she squawks so persistently that she does the work of a dozen. Alibhai-Brown claims that immigrants to this country are more comfortable with a "British" than an "English" nationality. That is surely because there is no encouragement of an inclusive English civic identity in this country, although such identities are encouraged for Scotland and Wales. New arrivals in England have "Britain" and "British" rammed down their throats right from the start.

To be of "British" nationality on this island simply means that you are a permanent resident of England, Scotland or Wales. I recently read an article written by a Scot which stated that: "You can be born in Scotland and not be a Scot". This is racist, of course, and you will find examples of this attitude in England and Wales, too. But such comments are to be treated with contempt. If you are a citizen of England, Scotland or Wales, wherever you were born, then you are entitled to be classed as English, Scottish or Welsh.

Do not let the "You have to be of Anglo-Saxon/Celtic origin to be English/Scottish/Welsh" arguments blind you either. The English are not purely Anglo Saxon and the Scottish and Welsh are not pure Celts (in fact recent genetic research indicates that the Celts never made it to these islands en masse).

Likewise, the BNP is not an English racist party - it is British.

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown blames the English for the Empire and has a huge chip on her shoulder. She is infantile and hysterical in the extreme and her grasp of the true facts of English/British history is far from perfect. But she never attacks the Scottish or Welsh. Probably because she knows they would answer back.

Alibhai-Brown chooses to be non-English and to do us down at every opportunity. New Labour loves her for that very reason. She suits their agenda in England of divide and rule.

If you live in England you are entitled to be English, whatever else you are. You are entitled to wave the Cross of St George; you are entitled to tell this government that you want a fair deal; that Scottish and Welsh jingoist politicians must pull in their horns; that politicians with EU career aspirations must remember the simple rules of democracy at home first, and that you are entitled to see more of your taxes spent on your own country. The money funnelled off to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the EU is currently at a ridiculously high level.

Fight enforced, unelected regionalisation - a divided England has a far weaker voice. Question this undemocratic government at every opportunity - ask your local New Labour campaigners why the government hates England so much. Ask Tory and Lib Dem campaigners why they sit by and do nothing.

But above all get together. The people of England, regardless of race, colour or creed, must join together and fight for a return to democratic rule.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected.

Anti-English Employers...

It is interesting that Politically Correct employers, whilst spouting loads about respecting ethnicity and individuality will not, out of all the nationalities present in the UK, allow their staff to be "English" - whatever their origins.

Many employers in England have a policy of allowing staff to be white Scottish/white Welsh or white/British but not English on their ethnicity monitoring forms. Where does colour come into it? And as "British" is actually a blanket term for the English, Scottish and Welsh and the ethnic minority groups resident in Britain, why are the English the only component of Britishness not recognised individually?

With devolution and the increasingly unfair actions of Scottish and Welsh MPs towards the people of England, there has been an increased interest in England and Englishness from people of many different ethnicities. You do not have to be white to define yourself as English.

Many organisations believe that it is fine to discriminate against and demonise the English. They do not include the English nationality on their ethnicity monitoring forms because they believe that people who define themselves as "English" are evil racists. How's that for narrow minded stereotyping?

Take a look amongst the Scottish and Welsh sometime. But they aren't scapegoated.

Despite the actions of the "Scottish Raj" in Parliament and the breakdown of democratic rule for the people of England, many organisations are determined to suppress any mention of England or Englishness.

Politically correct? Is that another phrase for fascism?

This blog is supportive of the aims of, but not affiliated to, the Campaign for an English Parliament.

Neil Kinnock - Welsh Anti-English/England Bigot

The Treasury conference "The Values of Britishness" on 28th November 2005 saw Scottish and Welsh and other speakers all explaining and defending their interests.

But nobody spoke up for England and the English.

Then Mr Kinnock spoke - bringing the conference's not-terribly-well-hidden agenda right out into the open:

"I am pro-Britain in everything I do. I always support Britain. I support the British Lions on every occasion. I support any and every Welsh team on every occasion. And I support any and every team on every occasion when they are playing against England."

Roars of approving laughter here.

England's tax payers provided most of the funding for this grotesque thrash - which amounted to a declaration of hostility to England from the no-mandate-to-govern-England New Labour government and their "enlightened" Politically Correct hangers on.

Bizarre.

This blog is supportive of the aims of the Campaign for an English Parliament, but is in no way connected to that organisation.

Join The Campaign...

If You Are A Citizen Of England Then You Are Being Discriminated Against By The UK Government.

Did You Know That Public Spending Is Much Higher In Scotland And Wales Than It Is In England? Did You Know That Certain Cancer Treatment Drugs Are Available On The NHS In Scotland, But Not In England? Did You Know That Foundation Hospitals & Top-Up Fees Were Forced On England By Scottish MPs, Whilst Scotland Will Have Neither?

Did You Know That The New Labour Government Is Still Breaking England Up Into Tin Pot Regions, Despite A Massive "NO" Vote In The North East, The Only Area Allowed A Referendum On The Subject?

Join The Campaign For An English Parliament - Join The Fight To Restore Democracy To This Country -
Take A Look Here...

Open To All Citizens Of England.

This blog is supportive of the aims of, but not affiliated to, the Campaign for an English Parliament.

Democratic Rule for England? Lord Falconer of the Scottish Raj Says "NO!"

Unelected Scottish peer Lord Falconer, a close buddy and ex-flatmate of Tony Blair, has declared that England can not have a parliament. BBC Online ran a poll, and over seventy per cent voted that England should have its own parliament...

But the Scottish Raj is not interested in democratic rule for the people of England.

There follows an interesting e-mail from Sue Campbell:

So Lord Falconer says no parliament for England. Not today. Not tomorrow... blah, blah, blah...

That's what he thinks.

My dad is a Scot - born and bred, proud, occasionally (very) anti-English (although he married an Englishwoman and lives in England) and he generally believes that England owes Scotland. Big time...

I don't.

Let's scoff down a few bones of contention...

Some Scots: "It's oor oil": It's British oil until the Union breaks up - and then some of it will be in English waters [Hasn't the Blair government been fiddling around with the historic maritime boundary between Scotland and England to try and diddle England out of its share of the oil? - Chris]. Scotland has benefited many times from England, the country was saved from bankrupcy at the time of Union by England, and many subsidies and special favours have been done for Scotland over the years. Scotland benefited from being a mover and shaker in the British Empire movement and basically has done very well out of the Union. It's connection with England has given it opportunities and a louder voice on the world stage than it would ever have had on its own.

Then, good fortune - oil! But that's "oor oil. Scottish oil."

Spoilt brat attitude, I'm afraid.

Some Scots: "We deserve to have a go at England because of Thatcher."

Why? The vote at the time of Thatcher was split by the emergence of a new political party, which was not without Scottish influence, and the Mag Monster benefited. Certain parts of England certainly didn't benefit from her reign. Many Scots were in favour of the early arrival of the Poll Tax in 1989, and it was dreamt up by a Scotsman. And that's the way it goes. For better, for worse. Good times and bad. A union. All over now. Water under the bridge.

None of it justifies John Prescott stomping all over the English countryside, Peter Hain advocating apartheid, the government imposing regional assemblies on England, and the establishment of an elected national assembly for Wales and a parliament for Scotland. Or the West Lothian Question. Or the continuation of the Barnett Formula.

It is not fair. It is not democratic. It is not indicative of the Scots and Welsh MPs being Union minded. Unless it benefits them.

Of the countries of the UK, England was the most submerged by the Union. When some Scots and Welsh folk wittered on and on and on about Big Bad England over the years, answer usually came there none. That's because many of us didn't identify with England - we were too busy having "Britain" rammed down our throats, and being scapegoated for the British Empire.

Now, people like Lord Falconer think they can do what they want in England. England has gone. Gordon Brown desperately screeches "Britain! Britain! British! British!" and if you speak up for England you are a "little Englander", a stock, nonsensical phrase, trotted out for years by people who don't like the concept of England.

The problem here is actually Little Scotlanders and Walesians - dedicated to buttering their own parsnips; it's the PC crowd in England, demonising their own country and flag; it's England's MPs - so lazy and comfortable; it's the lure of the EU on MPs. Now, I favour communication and interaction with Europe and the World, but the EU is becoming less and less democratic. Very like New Labour. Very like Lord Falconer on Friday and his dictate to the people of England.

Big bad unified England has had its way for too long? No.The whole system of government needs adjusting to take account of the needs and wishes of the people of England? Yes.

Down with undemocratic regionalisation of England. Down with New Labour dictates. Let the people speak.

UPDATE - 7/7/2006

Paul Hinchcliffe writes:

Interesting blog - I was brought here by your article on the Cornish Question which is causing some flutters of interest and consternation, but have had a read through. You're right about the UK Government tweaking the Maritime Boundary between England and Scotland to favour Scotland when it comes to the oil. And guess what? Nobody spoke up for England!

I guess you're an emotional idealist... it's quite refreshing. Keep it up.

Glad the Cornwall article is creating some interest. Emotional idealist? Thanks - I think! I know I get quite emotional when I think of the UK Government changing things to suit the ruling elite in Scotland. In fact, I get so emotional, I get a knot in my stomach!

GRRRR...

This blog supports the aims of, but is in no way connected to, the Campaign for an English Parliament.

New Labour Breaks Up England - Electorate Ignored

So, Home Secretary Charles Clarke has announced that we are to have new regional police forces without the promised vote in the Commons.

This will soon be reality.

Fewer police forces, covering much larger areas. Sounds dreadful to us. But nobody asked us.

Despite concern and opposition from the police and the public, the first mergers will soon begin.

All this has been rushed through. There are many concerns about it. A few bleatings have even been heard from the Opposition - which means things must be bad.

But the Government is determined to force regionalisation onto England, despite the North East's massive "No" vote, despite the fact that no other area has been allowed to venture an opinion.

"Regionalisation by stealth" it has been called. Surely not? New Labour are more like a herd of rogue elephants, crashing around, trampling all over us, denying us a voice and determined to have their own way. Perhaps they believe that if they rush this through early in their current reign, there will be plenty of time to sweeten us up before the next General Election?Some hopes.

Our police forces today... our counties tomorrow?

This blog supports the aims of, but is in no way connected to, the Campaign for an English Parliament.