Regular readers of the English Radical blog may recall a post made here recently (“ Clegg’s Green Mile”) highlighting the fact that the Lib-Dems were undertaking a taxpayer funded re-branding exercise in an attempt to reverse their well deserved pariah status which came with helping the Tories to power.

With this in mind, we cautiously welcome Nick Clegg’s apparent conversion to at least one aspect of English Radicalism, with his call for a Distributist “John Lewis” style economy, with greater employee participation, decision making and capital investment. This has been one of our core principles since we set up ERA in the summer of 2009, and is even written into our constitution.

We take a pragmatic view of this situation in ERA – when our website is full of good, practical policy ideas, it is perhaps asking too much of Oxbridge-educated politicians with no morals and no ideas of their own, not to steal ours. It's irksome when they steal our clothes off the washing line in this way, but we have the grim satisfaction of knowing that our ideas will reach a wider audience because of it, even if we do not get the credit for them.

As you've pinched one English Radical idea, Nick – why not have these other ones on us, and complete the set! Following the logic of encouraging greater worker participation and ownership in the businesses they help to run, why not allow corresponding voter participation and ownership in the political process? Just as a handful of supermarket chains dominate the retail sector to the detriment of smaller independent retailers, the centralised, all-powerful British government has even more of a monopoly in politics – so how about a change to devolved, localised decision making and tax raising powers?

How about allowing the EU inspired “Regions” of Britain to become a Confederation of equal partners along the lines of the German “Lander” system, who effectively control their national government, instead of the system we have of iron rule by Westminster? How about allowing binding public referendums over such issues as continued membership of the EU, the funding of £9 Billion of foreign aid every year, or our continuing involvement in Afghanistan? Most importantly, can we have a written constitution please, based on existing English Common Law, and not the awful Roman/Napoleonic laws of Europe?

So, Lords and Masters, we know you are still out there, lurking behind our shed, waiting to pilfer more underwear – but think on: it is one thing for a politician to call for fairer distribution of power and investment in the workplace, as it does not directly affect you, but unless you are willing to “walk the walk” and match these proposals with equal freedoms in the political arena, voters will see through your empty rhetoric. Steal our policies if you must, but you are opening Pandora’s laundry basket if you do – because once people get a taste of freedom again, they will want more.

It's been an interesting week for economic news – those superstars of Distributism the John Lewis Partnership, a mutually owned retail group, has just announced that its 2010 profits rose 15% to £350 million, and its partners (employees) will share an increased bonus pot of £170 million - up from £151 million last year. This is a brilliant example of how successful the Distributist economic model can be: the company is well run but not owned by “fat cat” capitalists, so no bubbly for shareholders, all profit goes back into the business or is shared amongst the people who made the profits happen – the workforce!

In the same week, it was announced that taxpayer-subsidised Northern Rock bank would be paying out bonuses also - £13 million worth – despite making losses of £232 million! Guess whose pockets that came out of – yours! It took an idiot midwife of Gordon Brown's calibre to bring this unwanted baby into the world – fathered by greedy capitalist banks that go wrong with massive losses, and then mothered by the Labour government who decided socialism was the answer and lumbered taxpayers with the bill.

John Lewis is also raising £50 million through a retail bond issue aimed at customers. It has raised finance through bond markets before, but the "partnership" bond is the first time that it has let its customers invest. The bond will be available to 1.5 million cardholders and 70,000 staff, or "partners". The five-year fixed rate bond will be offered to qualifying individuals to invest a lump sum of between £1,000 and £10,000, in multiples of £1,000. It has a fixed annual return of 4.5% in cash with a further 2% paid in John Lewis Partnership gift vouchers. Once again this represents the fine practice of distributism. Where the British Government borrows money, John Lewis aims to issue bonds to raise capital for further growth. This even shows how we can reclaim the ‘family silver’ of the utilty companies, placing them back in the ownership of the people rather than fat cat directors.

The John Lewis partnership should not be looked at as an eccentric “one-off” business, but the model for all future business in England – businesses well run with pride by their partners, not taking a penny piece off the taxpayer, and not for sale to foreign corporations waving money under their noses. Doesn't all this make sense?

We're sure as you trudged around the shops at Christmas various people dressed as Santa or elves rattled collection tins at you, and being enthused with festive cheer you gave generously. Here's a question for you - when you threw those coins into the collecting tin, did you give any thought as to whether the money collected went to the people who needed it, rather than sitting in a bank account making money for the charity that collected it?

Nearly twelve months on from the Haiti earthquake, the people there are still living in cardboard boxes and dying from cholera, whilst hundreds of millions of dollars donated from around the world are still sitting in well known charity's bank accounts, being gobbled up by “admin” charges – big salaries to CEO's in other words - and on researching further we have discovered that a well known musician, who fronts a charity that collected £9.6 million from well wishers in 2008, has handed over just £118,000 (1.2%) to actual aid schemes, while £5.1 million was earmarked for salaries: shocking, by any standards.

And when is charity not charity? When the British government decides to take £8.4 billion a year out of your pay without asking, some of which ends up buying hookers, bodyguards and limos for politicos and gangsters in third world hell holes all around the globe, all in the name of “overseas aid”! Fake charities and overseas aid are two of the biggest scams being perpetrated on people in this country,  and the English Radicals say all this must stop – especially when people in England are in need. For example those on disability living allowance (DLA), face having this benefit withdrawn. ERA has a member who has to claim DLA as a result of injuries sustained during military service, why should he be deprived of this allowance, paid for in spilt blood and broken bones? Why should a disabled person in England have to do without this money, whilst funds can be found for able bodied foreign despots?

And would you like an example of how much £8.4 billion is, and what it could buy? £8.4 billion a year would provide free English university places for 933,000 students, at £9,000 a year, every year! Something to keep in mind, next time a ConDem Coalition minister tells us we must all tighten our belts........

The overseas aid budget for 2010 – which is extra money the British government will actually have to borrow and the taxpayer pay back, with interest, as the country is in debt - is effectively dead money, with no expectation of any return. So we make this plea to the British government: Stop stealing this money from us, which is simply gifted to foreign governments - instead, encourage British taxpayers via a tax allowance, to lend money (via local credit unions and microfinance programmes) directly to poor people in the third world instead of throwing money straight into the pockets of corrupt foreign government officials. Britain has one of the best records anywhere in the world for charitable giving – why not build on this generosity, instead of thieving it from us? Why not make it part of your “Big Society” programme, Mr Cameron?

Each borrower (or group of borrowers) could initially take out one small loan, whether it be to build a schoolhouse, or to buy seeds, livestock or farming tools – further loans would be made available on the condition that any earlier loans are repaid on time and in full. Typically, people who borrow this way rarely default, because they want to be able to borrow again as their lives improve and their businesses grow. Also, the funds can be managed by local representatives (which would provide some much needed local employment), who would be expected to maintain the highest standards of fiscal accountability, or face removal from their post.

This type of financing can, and does, change lives for the better in the third world – and is totally in tune with our Distributist principles, because:
We believe that corrupt and inept centralised institutions like the British government should not be able to just steal from us and simply hand it over to other corrupt and inept central agencies, with no conditions or any chance of any return: 

We do not believe in subsidy and hand outs to hard men and gangsters, as successive British government's have done, but we are willing to offer a helping hand to the very people that need it - the poor -  by enabling them to escape their lives of grinding poverty through hard work and enterprise. 

Once this scheme was up and running and the bugs ironed out, we would then offer this financing deal to English people interested in starting, or buying out, their own business. Imagine how useful this facility would have been to the workers at Cadbury, or Corus steelworks in Teeside!

Governments have a responsibility to spend taxpayer's money wisely and frugally, but sadly the British government feels it is accountable only to the EU and itself. So please Mr Cameron, with the festive time of year still in our minds, remind yourself and your rich chums in Cabinet to spare a thought for your own countrymen: many struggling to make ends meet while you stop their DLA, others priced out of higher education, while the money that could have given them that education is wasted on kissing the backsides of foreign crooks and thieves, because as they no doubt taught you at Eton – CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME!

This week we have witnessed plans which will have a devastating impact upon the people of England. George Osborne’s proposals will possibly achieve what Hitler’s Luftwaffe failed to do during World War II, and destroy what is left of our industry and our communities. The heirs of Margaret Thatcher now truly walk the corridors of power and aim to finish the job the ‘Iron Lady’ started and to some degree what the Blair-Brown Tory-Labour regime continued.

We had the speech about what was going to be slashed and then a few words about what the Government intends to spend some of its money on. The speech was delivered as if we all should be grateful that the Government was prepared to spend money which the likes of every hard working person in England helps create. Such is the true disdain the George Osborne’s of this world have for people outside of millionaires row.

On the surface Osborne attempted to make the cuts look respectable, claiming they were all necessary. Most people do agree the cuts are necessary, but the areas these cutbacks will hit, such as investment in job creation will have far reaching devastating effects. Whilst other countries are investing in training and job creation, the Con-Dem Government is cutting back. This can only lead to England falling further behind other nations, with more companies relocating abroad.

Another area where the Osborne has made a miscalculation is local authority housing. Many people in what is commonly called ‘council houses’ are on low incomes with a large number having to receive housing benefit. Osborne plans to increase rents in local authority housing to near the level of rented properties in the private sector. Therefore, despite more money being generated from increased rents, more shall have to be paid in housing benefits. This also poses the question, to reap more money, will the sum for housing benefit be almost abolished when the Universal Benefit comes into effect?

When it comes to making cutbacks perhaps the Government should look at its military campaign in Afghanistan, a land which the might of the British Empire and the former Soviet Union failed to conquer. Our involvement in Afghanistan and our general position as a military poodle of the USA and NATO is costly in terms of lives lost as well as money, and also acts as a catalyst to bring the war and terrorism to the streets of England. Perhaps the Government should look at the vast sums of money it sends to the European Union, helping to fund the gravy train and the expenditure of other countries. Perhaps the Government should look at foreign aid, much of which ends up in the hands of corrupt politicians or multi-national companies instead of the people it is intended to help. Perhaps the Government should tighten regulations that allow their super rich friends to take billions out of the country without paying a penny in tax. Perhaps they should truly look at the greed of the global capitalist system which dragged us into this mess in the first place!

Needless to say, the English Radical Alliance is firmly opposed to the scale and direction of cutbacks the Con-Dem government wish to make. We are the leading English political party in fighting these cutbacks as we recognise the severity of them and the detrimental effect they will have on the English economy and the people of England. Over the coming weeks and months we will be actively campaigning against the negative Con-Dem proposals which will rob the next generation and England of its future. We will be pushing our distributist forward as an alternative to the failed capitalist and socialist systems almost all the other parties favour. If the foundations of a house are collapsing the whole building is unstable. The same can be said of an economy. Unless it is built on solid foundations one day it will collapse. Build it on the same foundations and it will collapse again. Unfortunately the major parties and even some of those that fly the Union flag and the Cross of St.George would simply rebuild the country on the same unstable foundations. With this in mind, the English Radical Alliance represents the only true alternative.