JIHADIST WATCH - AT THE BECKETTS PARK MARINA

Adam Simmonds, Northamptonshire's hapless Police and Crime Commissioner, may be doing more to destroy single handedly the local Tory's future election chances at the moment than the whole of the combined opposition could muster in a lifetime.

But as he puts his first annual budget to bed after a somewhat pointless low key consultation excercise he would do well to reflect on some of the County forces more bizarre spending commitments and question whether or not he and the force have got all of their priorities in order.

On Friday whilst waiting to be collected for a meeting next to a the Police forces stand in the Guildhalls One Stop Shop, I happened across a warning on a leaflet from Northamptonshire Police informing me that the local constabulary together with the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) and the UK Border Agency were

"Strengthening our borders"

and were

"Protecting the waterways of Northamptonshire"

Feeling relieved that Becketts Park Marina was now safe from any imminent Al Queda strike I couldn't help read further into the very nice and glossy leaflet to discover more as to how I as a member of the public could play my full part in protecting the County's borders from water bound Jihadists and International smuggling rings. I wasn't disappointed.

But was does a river vigilante look and listen for I hear you ask? Well amongst the very helpful advise i was told to be on my guards for people who give

"evasive answers to common boating questions"

Now, I have always been suspicious about people who don't know the difference between their boating knots and I will now make a point of asking so called daytrippers and holiday boaters to tell me the difference between their Alpine Butterfly Bends and Rat Tail Stoppers.

Also there was some very helpful advise for my future Grand Union Canal watch on suspiciously painted Narrowboats I should I am told  be wary of

"persons walking around the vessel independent of each other, taking notes ostensibly on operations and meeting as a group after their observations are recorded to compare notes"

please click for full leaflet and more from PROJECT PEGASUS

Wow, I just new that all of those bearded guys (and some girls, with and without beards) from the Northamptonshire Inland Waterways Association were really up to no good inviting boats in from other parts of the country to cross the counties water border to rally on frog island. And to think I used to sit and sip real ale with them and answer their questions on government affairs!

I will now have to call the Project Kraken hotline to share with them my concerns or I could email them at their dedicated email ports@northants.pnn.police.uk

And for those of you now really worried about the safety of the Stoke Bruene canal museum and or an unwelcome assault up the Blisworth tunnel you can also watch the northantspolice youtube video below for more handy tips on spotting the Marine based mujaheddin. The video fronted by TV presenter Nici Matthews begins with images from 9-11 before going on to show us clips of battleships, sea based military operations and young couples being caught under boat tarpaulins obviously up to no good. My favourite clip is the "How to spot a terrorist section" apparently they could look like Belgian female students! The video it seems was shot in Hamphire and may not be too relevant for River Nene based surveillance operations

Now of course terrorism is no joke, and we all I am sure are aware of when something is just not right, but in times of austerity and competing pressures on police funding is Project Kraken and their combined leaflet and video spend really a top priority in Britain's most landlocked county?

And before you all go off on boat watch, if you think the above is just a one off then how about pondering over the police spend on PROJECT PEGASUS !

You guessed it Northamptonshire Polices high profile campaign against possible serious crime and terrorist activity at the County's International Airports (well Sywell) Now let me be clear here Sywell could well be a target for terrorist activity and plane based attacks, after all the whole 911 atrocity started with flight training at a similar US based airport, but we already have clear operational procedures in place to protect our airstrips small and large. So do we really need a high profile public input? Sywell may only cater for just a handful of flights each day but the public leaflet and associated video warn us all to be on our guard against strange questions from pilots, crew or passengers.

please click for full page

please click for full page

Now again whilst probably and realistically more of a threat than any boat based Taliban threat, is it necessary to have anything more than our local special branch having a word in the ear of the the management and staff at Sywell to keep us all safe from any major light aircraft threat.

Do we the Northamptonshire public, who rarely if ever visit Sywell apart from the odd wedding reception really need leaflets and videos to inform us all to look to the skies and be aware of strange aviation activity when visiting Sywell?

Perhaps Adam Simmonds could inform us how the above Projects fit into his "Getting better value for money" pledge?

Or as the man says himself

“Much is known about what policing strategies can reduce crime and what things are a waste of public money. I will ensure that evidence forms part of local debate about policing. I will not be afraid to pilot innovative approaches to crime reduction and learn from mistakes."

CAMERON, LYING CONNIVING LITTLE GIT? YOU DECIDE

Regular followers of this blog will recall the short series I posted about 12 months ago trying to explain the perilous state of the UK economy in plain english.

If you missed them and want to catch up, they still remain valid and accurate in their conclusions and can be found here:

http://tonyclarkeindependent.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/its-economy-stupid.html

http://tonyclarkeindependent.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/its-economy-stupid-part-two-micawber.html

http://tonyclarkeindependent.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/it-economy-stupid-part-3-around-world.html

The point I and indeed many others were making throughout these and similar posts is that the coalitions reckless cut and burn anti growth budgets would inevitably lead to the strangling of any green shoots of recovery,  and that as a result we would still be borrowing huge amounts year on year, and in doing so getting ourselves ever  more debt than when we started, this in fact, coupled with the then Euro crisis was the only probable outcome of the coalition governments cut and burn policy..

But to listen to the Chancellor and the PM, they would have you believe that WE not THEY are in the wrong.

So what do you call someone who knowingly tells an untruth? or is being economical with the actualite? someone who tells porkies? whose language is dishonest?

In my world you call them a lying conniving little git, but let's be kind and let you be the judge as to who is lying to who

On the 23rd January 2013 in a scripted party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative Party the Prime Minister David Cameron said the following:

"So this government has had to make some difficult decisions, we are making progress, we're paying down Britain's debts"

Very clear there then, and when he came into office our debts were about £750 bn. So what has he paid them down to after 2 years of austerity ? when asked by the Tories in the same party political broadcast the public said it had perhaps gone down by about 2%, before being told by the Tories it ihad actually reduced by 25%! This 25% reduction figure would put the debt now at around the £562 bn mark or perhaps given the lack of growth it's not quite that good and we still owe £600 bn?

Now if you agree with any of the above then unfortunately you and the Prime Minister are both well dillusined and way out in your mathematics.. You see our debt today in 2012 is in fact £1,100bn.

SO UK DEBT SINCE THE COALITION CAME TO POWER HAS IN FACT RISEN BY £350 bn

Or in other words it has grown by almost 50%, now that wasn't mentioned in the broadcast!

The 25% reduction figure they mention is nothing more than the reduction in the total annual borrowing amount (the deficit, between income and spending)  We are simply borrowing 25% less each year as we cut public spending on services and pay more out on welfare, at this rate our borrowing will have risen to £1,500 bn by 2018, or in other words doubled since 2010

For clarity here are the official figures from the ONS (Office for National Statistics) as at Dec 2012

Not wanting to be left out the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, desperate as always to match the PM gaffe for gaffe made his own statement saying that the government is:

"wiping the slate clean of debt"

Well Nick, just how clean will it be by the time you leave office in 2015? as according to the ONS below we will be £550 bn more in debt than when you took up your office!

All of the above was revealed in the usually Tory friendly Spectator, who also helpfully told us that those who have fallen for the government's wicked deceit are in fact in the majority, as just 6% of the public actually know that the national debt is rising not falling.

Should we congratulate the government on getting away with such a whopping great falsehood? or be angry at them and the press for allowing such a deception?

I am in the later camp and I believe that the standard of political integrity and honesty has fallen to an all time low, and it;s high time the UK press got off its knees and told the British public the truth.

Our children and grandchildren will not thank us for closing our ears to the truth or swallowing the untruths of the great and the good, for all their sakes it's time for a bit of good old fashioned unbiased honest political commentary.

ITS TIME FOR ROGER TO STOP SHIRKING AND SKIVING, DAM SCROUNGER THAT HE IS

All bullies use name calling as their first offensive move against their intended victim, and it matters little if we try to distinguish the difference between the school bully belittling the small child in the playground to the most extreme human atrocities known to mankind such as Hitlers stigmatisation and eventual extermination of millions of Jews in the 1940's, the name calling still has the same purpose and the same reasoning, it's reason is to at first isolate and to separate from the "norm" their potential victims.

If the bully can make us all believe that their intended victims are not normal like us then it follows that it will matter less to us all what is eventually done to them. And if they can make you believe that these"not normal" people are actually acting against our interests, and having it easy whilst the rest of us struggle, then all the better

And so it is that the return in government of the nasty Tory party at Westminster, backed up (like most bullies are) by their yellow bellied Lib Dem friends has led to the current linguistic comparisons between SHIRKERS and WORKERS and SKIVERS v STRIVERS.  An us and them society wherein the "them and us" is a definable line between who contributes to society and who doesn't, and so successful have they been since forming the coalition government in peddling this lie that they have actually managed to form and shift public opinion from a position of truth to what is a false perceived truth.

The Independent newspaper published figures last week from the TUC, outlining public attitude and opinion towards those in receipt of welfare payments and the results where very disturbing. 

Asked what % of the total welfare budget gets spent on the unemployed the public perception was 41% whereas the actual figure is just 3%! 

Asked what % of benefits are claimed fraudulently the people came up with a figure of 27% the reality is 0.7%

Asked what proportion of the those claiming job sellers allowance were still claiming after a 12 month period the answer given was 48% where the actual figure is just 27.8%

And what was frightening but perhaps predictable is that those who gave the most inaccurate and over pessimistic answers were those who were most vocal in expressing the need to strip away the dependency culture.

That so called dependency culture and the continued victimisation of benefit recipients led to the Chancellor George Osbourne saying to the press last week (aiming his comments of course at you and me)  that he was on the side of:

"The shift worker, leaving home in the dark hours of the early morning, who looks up at the closed blinds of their next door neighbour sleeping off a life on benefits"

Perhaps now is the time for the Tory party to insist that all welfare recipients now wear cut out white S's on their lapels so that we can all identify the SHIRKERS and SKIVERS and probably SCROUNGERS who are walking amongst us?

But of course in Tory Britain not all welfare recipients are unemployed. And the failure of so many in the private sector to pay a living wage has lead to increasing numbers of those who are leaving their homes in the dark hours of the early morning also being the recipients of benefit in the form of family or working tax credits. In fact because of the freeze on public pay more and more of those on benefit are those paid for by the public sector in the first place! 

And so it has come to pass that over 75% of those affected by the governments cuts to welfare payments agreed in Parliament earlier this week are actually people already in work!

And the other real sickener for them and for all of us who still care about such old but still laudable values such as equality and fairness is the government misuse of % rises to justify claw backs on benefit.

"those out of work have seen bigger % increases than those in work" they say in another attempt to divide the nation, but a small % of very little is still, well, very little.

Of course the more you have, the more that % is worth to you in hard cash. For all of us lucky to be working, a small increase in % pay is still a little more on our hopefully living wages. A public employee on £20,000 a year will still take home a modest but just about livable salary before and after their forthcoming 1% rise after years of 0% freezes.

Two wrongs do not make a right so how can we compare the miserable increase in the workers wages with the almost irrelevant increase in some benefits? Britain's growing youth unemployed will care little for their benefit increase on the £56.25 they receive, a 1% will give them a rise of 56p, match it to inflation and it still only rises just above a quid! What they would rather have of course is work.

Think also therefore of those millionaires whose top rate tax dropped from 50% to 45% last April, there 5% was worth as much as £107,000 a year for the 8000 in the UK with an income of £1m plus.

But what about the SHIRKERS and SKIVERS sleeping off their life on benefits?

Let us for a minute put to one side the Tory lies over who will really be affected by these swinging cuts and concentrate on those supposedly laying in their beds all morning!

Well for example Roger from Northampton who is 56 and who has worked a life in the Construction Industry and paid tax for all of those years but who now finds himself on Jobseekers allowance after being laid off as "unfit" Roger is trying desperately to find work despite his tired old body rebelling against him and with him being in more pain for him to bear most days, but of course no where near the new higher thresholds for disability benefit.

Roger's SKIVING sees his rent and council tax paid for him and therefore he can spend the whole of his weekly Jobseekers allowance on himself! all £71.00 of it! of course he is privileged as being over the age of 25 he is on the higher rate and not eaking out an existence for him on the reduced rate of £56.25, no way, he can really spend spend spend.

And next year under the Governments new plans he will get an extra 71p! or he would do if it were not for the fact that his two bed house is deemed to big for him and his daughter who visits and stays over 3 nights a week, so next year he will have his housing benefit docked under the bedroom tax rules and have to make the difference up from his £71.71p

But the 1% rise is only just below 2.2% expected inflation figure right? who are they trying to kid, Rogers gas and electricity bills, now paid on a card due to him not being able to pay the bills went up 9% this year alone and a similar rise is planned next. His expenditure on gas and electric is now around £900 a year well below the £1309 average bill as when he has no money left he has no gas and electric! So there goes £17.30 of his £71.00 before he has even started.

So now lets go shopping with his remaining £53.70 well the average UK spend per person on food is relatively low at around £42 a week on food and £8 on toiletries and cleaning products. Roger of course cannot afford such extravagances and manages to spend only when he needs to and says most weeks he gets by with spending about £30 on both in total (no beer, no fags) , his biggest regret is that he never has the spending power to afford the bulk purchases which often can reduce the bill, he goes to the supermarket once a week for the weekly shop but relies on the corner shop at higher cost when he runs out of bread or milk etc. His prudence leaves him well placed post shopping with a whopping £23.70p left to spend on himself! well that is after the phone bill £5, and a luxury (linked internet) £3, leaving £15.70 in his pocket

He used to have a washing machine but that broke and he can't afford a replacement so now he walks to the launderette and feeds its machines with £3 a week to wash his clothes,  down now to £12.70 but of course clothes wear out, but replacing them is almost an impossible task on his income he probably spends on average £150 in total a year on clothes compared with the average of £300 a year in the UK His spend is on Primark T shirts and socks and briefs, shoes coats and jeans are a charity shop purchase or a bargain basement find, but his average £2.88 a week clothing spend needs to come off his ever dwindling total leaving just £9.82 in the kitty

He has no transport bill, no pets to feed, but he does go wild at the weekend and buy a Sunday newspaper, the demise of the Chronicle and Echo has saved him £3 a week but the weekly copy of the Sunday Mirror still reduces his £9.82 benefit bonanza by a further £1 to £8.82.

But he never has £8.82 left in his pocket? so why? Well sometimes I have to buy batteries or a light bulb goes or I get carried away and buy a few sweets for the grandkids, I don't bother with going out these days its pointless, I couldn't afford one pint nether mind a couple, I used to have a ready reckoner (Yankee) at the bookies at the weekend (£2.10) but that went out the window a long while ago.

More often than not Roger will spend any spare cash he has on cheap gifts he sees when out shopping, he knows he shouldn't but he can't afford to spend any different at Christmas time so if he sees items going cheap throughout the year he buys them and goes without himself so that he can keep still keep his dignity and still wrap something up for those close family members around him.

According to the Tory's Roger is living his days in abundance, life is a bed of roses, he is on easy street living a life of exorbitant benefit driven prosperity, it's the good times, the gravy train, and if only he was foreign he could be doing even better for himself, he knows all about this because even though he would never touch the Daily Mail, even the Sunday Mirror keep him informed as to who is getting his share of the country's wealth.

The governments attack this week on people like Roger is a wicked and evil act of bullying, it will do nothing to reduce the deficit caused by the government themselves due to their failure to get the UK economy growing, they have caused the double dip recession, they alone are responsible for the ever increasing welfare bill due to ever rising joblessness. The amount the government is borrowing is rising not falling after two years of coalition incompetence, so someone has to take the blame and its not good enough to kick a man when they are down you also have to denigrate and belittle them amongst their neighbours and friends.

So come on ROGER, stop SHIRKING AND SKIVING and get with the project.

The Tory party to me are not the nasty party, they are simply a bunch of evil, and wicked bullying bastards who care nothing for the lives of those they deem to be beneath them and it's about time the British public woke up to the truth instead of swallowing the governments deceit and making an enemy of their neighbours based on right wing propaganda and divisive lies

MERRY CHRISTMAS 2012

A very Merry Christmas to one and all, and for a treat, no politics no moans, no groans, just Billy Bragg and Florence and the Machine giving a rare cover version of The Pogues Fairytale of New York.

Of course Billy and Kirsy MacColl were very close and co wrote "New England.

Have a good one.

"THE STORY OF STUFF"

The animated cartoon featured in my last blog "Tax the Rich",  got me searching the net a bit deeper for others who have "animated" their political message and created their own narratives to which we all should be listening to and hearing but to which too many just switch off.

The "STORY OF STUFF"  is another little gem coming out from the USA (and there was me giving up on our overseas cousins)

This original video (all 21 minutes) is really worth watching. it was created just before the 2008 crash and went on to inspire a whole series of "Story of" mini movies.

Here is the 2007 original "THE STORY OF STUFF"

This was followed by a whole host of additional material including the two favourites of mine I have copied for you below. The first is a call for change and action, a plea for us, the 99% to get busy and make things happen:

 And if we want any more reason to understand why change is both needed and also unavoidable then the 2011 contribution the "THE STORY OF BROKE" brings us right up to date

I hope you have enjoyed the above, the full story of story of, all 27 videos can be found at  http://www.storyofstuff.org  

If you agree with the messages contained in the excellent short videos above then start your own revolution by simply sharing this page on to your friends. The journey towards real change is really that simple to begin.

TAX THE RICH: An animated fairy story

Couldn't resist sharing this little animated story with you:

And remember, "We are the 99%"

With thanks to enlightened Facebook friends....................

PRE CHRISTMAS CRACKERS

My apologies for the short delay in normal service, (lack of blogs) but a family bereavement and high work load temporarily threw me off course.

So to play catch up and give regular readers an insight into all things politically malignant I thought I would treat you to some short inputs and comments.

THE COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONER

Adam Simmonds as Northamptonshire's newly elected Police and Crime Commissioner has certainly not wasted any time in making himself and the Tory Party even less relevant and popular by announcing his appointment of up to 16 staff to help him in his newly elected role!

These include Assistant Commissioners dealing with a whole host of specialist areas, including advisers on Youth, Neighbourhoods and even faith.

But what is extraordinary about his employment rest is that most of the applicants are not applicants at all! They are just self appointed Tory party members. All it seems very eager to join the new Conservative Party managed gravy train. His election agent and the Tories current Political assistant at County Hall are just two among many new "crime" experts who will now be paid from the public purse.

He has though now, after much pressure, announced that some of these 16 posts will only be filled after a proper interview process has taken place. Late but laudable you may think?, until that is you see that he has already announced who will fill the posts before the interviews have even taken place!

Of course whilst making it clear he is quite prepared to spend way beyond the previous £800,000 revenue expenditure for the decommissioned Police Authority to make sure he gets the right staff, he is at the same time telling Police Officers and Staff that he cannot protect their jobs in the forthcoming budget round.

This man is doing more single handily to undermine and destroy the Conservative Party's future local and general election chances than all of the opposition parties in Northamptonshire could muster as a collective effort. (although Binners is a good second option at the moment)

Long may he continue in post!

LABOUR PAINS

Whenever I mention the ongoing troubles within the local Labour Party I get the same tired old complaints from over zealous members accusing me of not moving on or blaming the regional Labour Party for all of the Party's ills.

So let me make it very clear, I care little for what happens in the Labour Party's regional office or about who is currently responsible for their steady supply of political own goals, but I do find it astonishing to hear that the Local Party is once again to be suspended.

This means that since my expulsion way back in May 2007 that the local party has been suspended for longer than even my own personal expulsion lasted! I work out that of the 5 years and 7 months since that date, that the party has been under suspension for a total of 5 years and  2 months? But I stand to be corrected.

The latest suspension I am told is because there were so many complaints and counter complaints flying around related to individual Cllrs on the Labour Group of the Borough Council that the region thought it best to just once again pull the plug. In fact from just the small snippets I hear I doubt if there is a member of the Labour group left who currently is not complaining against a fellow comrade or who hasn't had a complaint lodged against them! So much for Fraternity!

Funny though really how the region always ensure that the party is suspended and never up and running when selections for election candidates are on the horizon, so once more their County Council candidates will need to be "appointed" by region rather than selected by local members. Now given that the last two panels of candidates for the County and Borough elections have been hand picked by region who should they blame for the infighting currently ensuing?

Meanwhile some even more disturbing news reaches me about serious criminal investigations in respect of one of their other elected members in Northampton, But in order to allow justice to be done I will of course refrain from revealing all or any of the details, but those inside the party may feel a little aggrieved that they didn't heed the warnings some including myself were giving them at least a year back!

PAYBACK TIME

Whilst focusing on the local  Labour Party's current (constant?) woes I must share with you the misgivings many party members are now expressing over the Party's choice for candidate at the next general election in Northampton North.

Now of course myself and Sally Keeble never really got on when we were both in the house , we were chalk and cheese, and I could never get away from the feeling that she felt my election in Northampton South was a distraction to her, she certainly seemed happier after I had gone and seemed to prefer having a Tory next door to shout at rather than a nuisance neighbour.

Another area where we were both miles apart was in respect of Sir Thomas Legg's enquiry into the MP's expenses scandal. I was pleased to receive early on in the enquiry a letter from Sir Thomas  saying

 "having examined the records in the light of my interpretation of the rules and standards in force at the time, I have not identified any payments made to you under the ACA during the review period which I consider call for any repayment or further supporting evidence to be provided by you. Accordingly, my conclusion is that no further action is required from you in this matter"

Not surprising really, as my office staff at the time will confirm that I wouldn't even claim insanity despite having more than enough evidence to boot!

Sally on the other hand you may recall got her self into a spot of difficulty by claiming for a whole host of "improvements" to her second home in Northampton including  according to the Daily Telegraphs expose:

"£5,000.00 worth of repairs to the kitchen of her constituency home in 2005, along with £2,403.00 on new appliances and work surfaces. She later claimed £950.00 for the “essential” replacement of her shower, toilet and washbasin, £3,072.00 for a new boiler and £7,669.00 for new windows., not to mention all those tree works in the garden!"

So concerned was she at the time that her largess may influence the way people voted that she along with many other "embarrassed" MP's made voluntary payments back to Parliament to prevent further criticism of the claims. The payments were made at the height of the furore over MPs’ expenses, as the public vented its anger about the widespread abuse of the system.

However, it has emerged that since then, nearly two dozen current and former MPs had quietly asked for the "repaid" money to be returned to them , after receiving lower than expected demands from the House of Commons authorities to repay any over claimed expenses.

And so it was that our Sally in 2010 after no longer being an MP and perhaps feeling less guilty about all those items she felt she had wrongly claimed for and therefore wanted to pay back,  joined 26 other MP's and former MP's in asking for a refund of their refund!

The Commons authorities therefore quietly and secretly sent her a cheque back for £3,737.74

But now she is standing for election again! So can she tell us, was she in her own eyes right in claiming the money for all of the above on her expenses in the first place? If so, then was she then wrong when she said after the scandal broke that she felt she had duty to pay some of the money back to Parliament?
And if she was right in paying "some" but not all of her claimed expenses back to Parliament in 2009 then why has she then secretly claimed it back since when she is no longer an MP?

VOTE NO TO PARISH COUNCIL IN ST JAMES

Whilst low turnout at the Police Commissioner Elections threatens to disappoint even the most optimistic commentators, the people of St James also have there Parish Poll to attend.

Of the two I have no doubt that the importance of the Parish Poll in which the Tories are attempting to offload responsibility and  service costs down to the local populace as an additional tax is the more important.

For some strange electoral jobsworth  reason, NBC are refusing to allow the polls for the PCC and the Parish Poll in St James to be held in the same building! even though different rooms could be made available.

It makes you wonder if they actually want any one to vote!

Anyhow my advice to the people of St James is outlined in the leaflet below which was delivered over the weekend.

If you know anyone is Jimmies End I would appreciate it if you shared this post via the net or even printed off a copy and gave it to them before Thursday.

Many Thanks


Tony

PLEASE CLICK ON THE IMAGES BELOW FOR A FULL SIZE PRINTABLE VERSION

ONLY FOOLS AND WATER GO THE WAY THEY ARE DIVERTED

I am sure I am not alone in refusing to buy into the self flagellation,  public trial and corporate punishment of the BBC over their own role in badly reporting the ongoing child abuse stories unfolding almost hourly before our eyes.

Yes we can, if we wish criticise them for not publishing and or revealing earlier and more openly their in house concerns on Jimmy Saville's behaviour over the years. And yes individuals within the BBC may have their own skeletons to hide away in the corporations prop cupboard.

But then after acknowledging what they got wrong ask yourself a few simple questions. Such as, when Jimmy Saville abused young girls on the wards of NHS hospitals was it the BBC who let them in onto ward in the middle of the night? When accusations were made to the Police over his possible paedophile activities was it the BBC that the police referred to over any possible prosecution not the CPS? And were the BBC not Social Services running the Children's Homes where he and others committed their vile acts? And was it the BBC who tied up young boys at the home before then transporting them around the country to large houses where they were abused and used as personal sexual playthings by evil men?

And then we have the more recent accusations related to the Bryn Estyn children's home in North Wales, Newsnight may well be sued by Lord Mcalpine for their role in repeating and reporting the allegations being made against him, even though they didn't name him at the time, but can they be really be guilty of encouraging the trial by internet which had already began to gather pace online prior to their report being aired?

Of course its not the BBC who is responsible for these wicked acts and the current blanket press coverage focusing on their role is both ridiculous and becomes little more than a self lit smokescreen.

We are now in danger of forgetting that this whole story is really about wicked and depraved child abuse, and not about who has accused who of what? This story isn't about the BBC or Lord McAlpine's and his internet accusers, it is about children and young people, going back many decades, who were subject to cruel and depraved sexual abuse.

That abuse centred on (but does not end with) children's homes in north Wales - and specifically the Bryn Estyn home near Wrexham this became news again earlier this month when victim Steve Messham spoke to Newsnight, claiming that the Waterhouse inquiry, released in 2000, had uncovered only a fraction of the abuse. This claim is also backed up by the questions asked by my good friend Tom Watson MP in Parliament.

But it was Steve Messham not the BBC who said McAlpine had abused him, and then withdrew his accusation a week later, saying he had been mistaken after the Police had shown him the wrong photo back in the 90's!

So what the hell is going on here, it was not the BBC it was the Police who had shown Steve Messham the wrong photo So are we not able to question, despite the obvious harm caused to Mr Messham as a result of his abuse, why in all the period of the 1990's to the current day he suggests he has only been shown and or has seen himself only two photos related to the case?

In his own words he says

"After seeing a picture in the past hour of the individual concerned, this [is] not the person I identified by photograph presented to me by the police in the early 1990s, who told me the man in the photograph was Lord McAlpine," 

Lord McAlpine will of course seek his own recompense against those who named him prior to his own statement, and his lawyers I am sure will look very carefully at the role played by the internet in publicly revealing and repeating Steve Messhams accusations, but it is important for all of us I believe to concentrate not an individual accusation, but on the wider issues involved. Only then will we get to the truth  instead of us all indulging in wild speculation as to what individuals and/or the BBC did or didn't do.

I still believe Tom Watson's claim that the abuse at Bryn Estyn Children's Home and others was carried out by a powerful group of Paedophiles which led all the way to the door of Number 10 during the Thatcher years and maybe even before her tenure, and I also believe that the current attacks on the BBC are far more than simply a coincidental sideshow.

Imagine if you will an establishment shook to its foundations by the whole scandal desperate for a quick diversion, in need of having the heat and light shone in a different direction, how could they possibly buy some time and sow confusion in the minds of the public, who could they use as a scapegoat? how could they manage and indeed change the news?

Well, simply by controlling it. If I was Lord Patten I would be more worried by who in high circles is deciding that it is acceptable to hang the BBC out to dry rather than simply castigating Newsnight and Panorama. I would be more worried as a Tory peer about any accusations of insider collusion rather than who will be the next Director General.

Premature publicity around the witch-hunt of dead celebrities and current political figures in absence of the facts is now detracting from what should be the real purpose here,  which is to find out the truth over the child abuse that has gone on in the past and bring all those guilty to justice in the hope that the victims (apart from the 12 who have all died prematurely since) some closure and make sure that such a cover up and collusion can not happen in the future.

The Public must not join the Police and the BBC and become obsessed with their own internal fault lines. They must not forget that by contemplating their own navels that by default they may be helping to conceal evidence that the abuse ever existed.

And they also mustn't be afraid to go to all lengths to get to the truth, even though the establishment will as ever put every obstacle they can find in it's way.

JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED -- SHAME ON THEM

I have spoken before on this blog of the "crisis of trust" which now prevails in our country as a consequence of a series of recent national events. The global economic crisis is exactly that "global" but only in the UK have we seen a series of "other" events which have then questioned both the authority and the integrity of all of our institutions, and challenged the very way in which we are governed

First the Banks were exposed as not to be trusted as they gambled our money away on the markets and gorged themselves on government handouts whilst the rest of us suffered and continue to do so.

Then we lost what little trust still existed in our politicians as the parliamentary expenses scandal (still unravelling) told us that in the main, (but not all) that they only really represented their own interests.

The media fell next as the ongoing  phone hacking revelations shamed editors, closed titles and led to a expose by public enquiry as to the sordid and corrupt workings of our national press.

But we still had law and order surely? Not so, Hillsborough finally did for the Police as 23 years too late they finally admitted that snr police officers had instructed police officers to lie and alter their statements as to what really occurred on that tragic Saturday afternoon in April 1989.

Those of us who were in Parliament during the passage of the 2nd public enquiry (Lord Justice Stuart-Smith) were also shaken then and now at his inability in 1998 to find the fault lines in Lord Justice Taylor's initial report. A warning then if need that not all public enquiries naturally operate in the public interest.

But it is the news today that the Prime Minister has asked for an investigation into the way claims of child abuse in a Welsh children's home, decades ago were originally examined, which will tip the scales of the British Judiciary too far away from the truth for them seemingly to ever be balanced again.

The investigation, (have we now lost trust in enquiries as well?)  follows almost daily revelations into the sordid and warped affairs of Jimmy Saville and threaten to be, without doubt the most damaging challenge that the wider British establishment has ever faced.

But it was only when my still good friend Tom Watson MP stood up in the House of Commons recently at PMQ's and asked the Prime Minister to comment on allegations of a 1980's Paedophile Ring  stretching all the way back to 10 Downing Street, that people started to really sit up and take notice of a wider cover up of paedophile activity in this country, far wider that Saville and his bosses at the BBC

Tom, asked the Prime Minister to investigate allegations that a  mystery senior Tory named by victims as part of that revelation is it is alleged to be amongst a group of 28 perpetrators that were never identified in public during or after the Lord Waterhouse enquiry which began in 1996 but did not report until the year 2000. Many people believe that powerful establishment figures  at the time prevented the full extent of abuse and the names of senior public figures being made public.

The enquiry looked at allegations of hundreds of cases of child abuse in care homes in former county council areas of Clwyd and Gwynedd between 1974 and 1990. Sir Ronald Waterhouse QC, a retired High Court judge, was appointed to head the inquiry. The inquiry began in January 1997.

More than 80 people, many of whom were care staff or teachers, were named as child abusers in statements to the inquiry. The inquiry was stated to be "the biggest investigation ever held in Britain into allegations of physical, sexual and emotional abuse of children who passed through the care system".The tribunal sat for 203 days, heard evidence from more than 650 people, and concluded in 1998.

Its findings were finally published in February 2000, as Lost In Care.The report named and criticised almost 200 people, for either abusing children or failing to offer them sufficient protection. It made 72 recommendations for changes, constituting a massive overhaul of the way in which children in care are dealt with by local councils, social services and the police.

However, it found no evidence for the existence of a paedophile ring extending beyond the care system, as had been rumoured. Why?

On his blog http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/  Tom outlines the serious nature of these allegations when he writes:

"many more ordinary people have contacted me about suspicions they have had of a wider wrongdoing – in some cases so heinous it made me cry.

They have talked of psychopaths marking children with Stanley knifes to show “ownership”. They tell of parties where children were “passed around” the men. They speak of golf course car parks being the scenes for child abuse after an 18 hole round.

And they have named powerful people – some of them household names – who abused children with impunity.

Two former police officers have raised their concerns of cover-ups. Child protection specialists have raised their fears that the network of convicted paedophile Peter Righton, the nexus of the group, was wider than at first thought.

Others have identified a former cabinet minister who regularly abused young boys.

Some have raised mysterious early deaths, disappeared children, suspicious fires, intimidation and threats.

It’s bewildering."

In a letter to the Prime Minister written today, Tom warns David Cameron that his announcement of an "investigation" does not go anywhere near far enough to get to the whole truth when he tells him

"My experience of uncovering massive establishment conspiracies leaves me in no doubt that what you have suggested does not go anything like far enough. Its limited scope may even slow things down, muddy waters, damage trails. What is needed is a much wider, but equally immediate, investigation."

There should be no historic sexual abuse of children which is off limits to this investigation. The police should be supported by a dedicated team of child protection specialists, many of whom have been raising their concerns for years. Your advisers will tell you to be wary of “opening the floodgates”. They are wrong. Their decorous caution is the friend of the paedophile. Narrowing the inquiry equals hiding the truth. That is the reality and it is not what you want.

 A dedicated police unit is essential, investigating the organised abuse of children, wherever it happened – from the seediest backstreets even to Downing Street – without fear or favour of exposing the rich and powerful, or those who covered up for them.

And if it opens a floodgate of misery, then so be it. We will all feel dirtied and sickened – as we should. Victims have an absolute right to the whole truth."

We can only hope that David Cameron is in a listening mood. I have seen a list of those from Tory high circles who it is alleged were involved in such abuse at the time and it is not a simple case of a single rotten apple!

Let us also hope that he starts listening to Steve Messham,  Mr Messham, claimed on BBC2’s Newsnight that he was repeatedly abused by a leading figure from the Thatcher era. The man's identity was not revealed any he denies the claims and it is believed has threatened to sue if he is named.

Mr Messham, one of hundreds of children believed to have been abused, and has requested a meeting with the Prime Minister to discuss the allegations. So far the PM has only responded to Mr Messham by suggesting he give any new information to the North Wales Police, but Mr Messham tweeted that his claims had not been taken seriously, He wrote: “North Wales Police knew years before the Waterhouse inquiry and Downing Street tell us to go back to them.”

This reveals a another wider, deeper question still remaining, Steve Messham and others are saying that all the evidence they are now giving to the authorities was given to the police way back at the time, and to Watehouse enquiry, so why is it only now that an investigation is being called for? And if there was a cover up, just who was involved?

Simon Regan, (now deceased) the former editor of Scallywag Magazine, is also convinced that the cover up went all the way to the top, writing online in 2000 he said the following:

In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed. Most of these interviews were extremely harrowing and disturbing, but were gently and sensitively conducted over pub lunches where the victim could relax. We subsequently persuaded ten of them to make sworn affidavits which we proposed to use as back up to half a dozen paedophile stories we later published.

Two of these young men, who had been 14-years-old at the time, swore they had been not only introduced to the paedophile ring operating in the Crest Hotel in Wrexham but had later been escorted on three or four occasions to an address in Pimlico where they were further abused.

We took them separately to Pimlico and asked them to point out the building where this had taken place. They were both positive in their identification. It turned out to be the private flat of a well known, and since highly discredited lobbyist who later went into obscurity in some disgrace because of his involvement with Mohammed al-Fayed and the 'cash for questions' scandal. At the time we ran a story entitled 'Boys for Questions' and named several prominent members of the then Thatcher government. These allegations went to the very top of the Tory party, yet there was a curious and almost ominous lack of writs.

The lobbyist was a notorious 'queen' who specialised in gay parties with a 'political mix' in the Pimlico area - most convenient to the Commons - and which included selected flats in Dolphin Square. The two young men were able to give us very graphic descriptions of just what went on, including acts of buggery, and alleged that they were only two of many from children's homes other than North Wales.

There was, to my certain knowledge, at least one resignation from the Conservative office in Smith Square once we had published our evidence and named names.

Subsequently, over a rent dispute which is still a matter of litigation, Dr. Julian Lewis, now Conservative MP for New Forest (East) but then deputy head of research at Conservative Central Office in Smith Square, managed to purchase the contents of our offices, which included all our files. It had been alleged that we owed rent, which we disputed, but under a court order the landlords were able to change the locks and seize our assets which included all our files, including those we had made on paedophiles. It was apparently quite legal, but it was most certainly a dirty trick.

All of a sudden very private information, some of it even privileged between ourselves and our lawyer during the John Major libel action, was being published in selected, pro-Conservative sections of the media.

Subsequently, during a court case initiated by Lewis, I was able in my defence to seek discovery of documents and asked to see the seized files. The paedophile papers were missing. This is a very great shame, because Sir Ronald Waterhouse certainly should have been aware of them.

I believe that the secrecy the Establishment wraps around itself easily equals that of the paedophiles. They really do look after each other and quite professionally cover their tracks.

The real trouble about exposing paedophiles is that former victims of child abuse make lousy witnesses. By the very nature of the abuse, when they are rudely shoved out into the wide world (one of the witnesses, Stephen Messham, for example, was released on his sixteenth birthday on Christmas day after two years of abuse, and had to sleep rough on the streets for four and a half months), they are often deeply psychologically disturbed.

The British State, its institutions and those who by their position within it are all responsible for both their actions, and/or omissions including those currently in office and at the time of these heinous crimes face an uncomfortable few weeks ahead.

Our society still in a state of shock from seeing the banks, our Members of Parliament, the media and the police and judiciary already weakened by past revelations, must now try to give reason to the way in which they have been governed and policed and judged. Unless clear and credible answers are forthcoming, the whole fabric of our society and the pillars it is built upon may begin to fall apart.

Paedophiles need exposing, catching and to be incarcerated, and if we uncover evidence that individuals whatever their political persuasion acting independently or collectively with others, covered up the actions of those child abusers and protected them from the law for political reasons thus allowing them to continue their abuse then their actions (those who cover up)  are as heinous if not more so than the child abusers themselves.

What price do we attach to Justice, and what final cost do we apportion to the act of concealment?