Across the country care homes and facilities for our elderly are being closed. With an increasingly ageing population, this is yet another example of how the human rights of our elderly are being eroded in this country today. 

Far from being treated with respect and dignity by the powers that be, our elderly and most vulnerable are almost regarded as a burden, with some herded from care home to care home as one by one they are closed down. Even within some of the care homes and sheltered accommodation schemes, resident wardens are being scrapped, thus further increasing the risk to the most vulnerable. This is nothing less than governmental neglect by the political elite who seem to think a duck house or a clean moat within their grounds is more important than a care home. 

We constantly hear the words ‘care in the community’, and are led to believe there is no reduction in the level of service when this is implemented. We are even told in some circumstances that ‘care in the community is better’. In reality ‘care in the community’ does not exist. How can evicting someone from a secure, safe and friendly environment in which they planned to spend the final years, into what is increasingly becoming a hostile, uncaring environment be better? How can replacing wardens which live on the premises with ones that live miles away not have a detrimental effect on the level of care? It’s impossible for this to be better for the majority of our elderly and vulnerable, whose wishes are not even taken into consideration. The only people it is better for are those trying to save money on services, who no doubt make these decisions whilst sitting in plush furnished offices. 

In the end what it boils down to is cost. For the governments of today feel it is better to fight to free the people of Baghdad and Kabul than to give our old folk the security and peace of mind they deserve in their final years. Unfortunately, with the proposed cuts the Con-Dem coalition plans to implement things are going to get a lot worse.  This will mean many of those that paid high taxes during the 1950’s. 60’s and 70’s will face even further hardship and governmental neglect.

The English Radical Alliance plan to oppose such cutbacks and campaign for the human rights our elderly and most vulnerable thoroughly deserve. Human rights which are currently being ignored.

You might be forgiven by the title for thinking that this piece is dedicated to that fine body of men who strike fear into Britain's enemies wherever they are posted, but in fact it refers to the favoured men and women of the Labour elite who regularly get “parachuted” into the safest of safe Labour seats throughout the length and breadth of the England – although rarely anywhere else in Britain, as Scots, Welsh and Ulster folk don't take kindly to outsiders representing them – something we in England should give a little more thought to at election times.......

ROLL CALL

David Milliband, born London, graduate, never had a proper job before entering politics.
MP for South Shields.

Ed Milliband, born London, graduate, never had a proper job before entering politics.
MP for Doncaster North.

Luciana Berger, born London, graduate, never had a proper job before entering politics.
MP for Liverpool Wavertree.

Lisa Nandy, graduate, voluntary sector work followed by stint as a councillor in London.
MP for Wigan.

Shaun Woodward, millionaire property tycoon and former Tory MP for safe seat of Witney (now David Cameron's seat!) in Oxfordshire, defected to Labour two years later. Went on to become:
MP for St Helens South.

One has to ask, what are the well heeled, or fresh from university, middle/upper class metropolitans listed above, bringing to the political table for their struggling constituents - people from depressed, working class, northern towns whose main trade was heavy industry or manual work in time gone by? In ERA’s eyes, modern Labour politicians are little better than drug dealers: when in power they  operated by guaranteeing their constituents a regular benefits “fix”, in return for support and devotion to a party that is secretly laughing at their junkie habit. While all this was going on, Labour were busy selling off what remained of British industry and infrastructure to foreign buyers. Desperate, benefit dependent people without prospects can be forgiven for tolerating parachuted candidates with no “real life” experience - but why do the local Labour parties roll over and allow these people to be foisted upon them?

The answer is that the local Labour parties are ruled with an iron fist by the central Labour party machine, and the result is that the “chosen people” can be dropped into safe seats by the Labour hierarchy. How does this benefit the local party (who in effect are being told that none of the local candidates are good enough), and more importantly the local electorate? ERA are not saying an outsider should never be selected, but to install candidates from such privileged backgrounds and with no common bond to their constituents, is patronising in the extreme. A further insult is that Berger and Nandy were selected from all women shortlists, imposed from above by New Labour central office. This discriminates against men, and shame on the local Labour parties for allowing it.

Centralised party management, just like centralised government, prevents local people from having  their say, even in local decision making, and for this reason ERA are committed to allowing its local branches full rights over their own affairs, from fund raising to selecting election candidates. We train them, and trust them to make their own decisions – they're grown ups, and they know what's best for their own patch. Can any of the LibLabCon parties say as much?............. Thought not!

The Con-Dem Government and their nu- Labour predecessors have argued a lot over taxes and spending. However when taxes are increased and cutbacks made, it is often the poorest in society which are hit the hardest.

When considering cutbacks all the major three parties ignore two areas which definitely need cutting back – these being our membership of the European Union and the present United Kingdom. 

Our membership of the EU is well documented – and England puts more in than it gets in return. Membership makes no sense when trade agreements can be written, joint projects conducted and travel across Europe arranged without membership of the EU. The fact remains membership of the EU only benefits large global corporations who feast from the top table whilse the rest of us scavenge for crumbs.

Membership of the United Kingdom is something else which the taxpayers of England subsidise. Every minute taxes raised in England flow across the sea to Northern Ireland and over the borders into Wales and Scotland to fund their government’s. The fact is the other home nations have devolution and the taxpayers of England pay the bill.

When will the English people wake up to the fact that if we liberated ourselves from Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland AND the EU, not only would we be able to do away with the proposed savage cuts to the English public services, but we would also be free to protect English firms from hostile takeovers (Kraft) and halt the imminent mass immigration from places such as Bulgaria and Rumania (and Turkey if Cameron gets his way). English independence is the logical conclusion of the current EU and devolution mess and the definite solution to the West Lothian question.