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?

Imagine this scenario: you have a steady job which pays well, but house prices are sky high and you are not able to leave the parental home. You share the house with your lazy, dishonest father whose name the (re)mortgage is in, who favours your grumpy half-siblings (they don't like you, but are quite happy to be kept housed and fed), and even strangers who your father has taken a shine to and invited in off the streets. Your feckless father has no intention of working for a living, but is fond of spending money – yours. Even though you are the main breadwinner, he insists as a condition of living under “his” roof, that you hand over all your wages, out of which he distributes to everyone in the household a small allowance to buy essentials. He keeps the majority of your wages for himself, and if he's spent too much in the pub or had a bad run of luck at the bookies, you will have your allowance cut even further – there's no way he's doing without his luxuries, even if you have to. Even though you are working, you are no better off than the siblings and “guests” who don't.

Does this sound like a fair situation, one that you'd personally be happy with? Well, if you're an English taxpayer, this is already happening to you. I'm sure once you realise that the “lazy father” in this parable represents the British Government, you won't have too much trouble identifying the other characters. Please, read on.

Eventually, a small house comes on the market locally which is affordable. You decide to buy it, and inform your family that you intend to move out, but their reaction is one of bitterness and anger,  with statements like: “after all we've done for you!” and “you won't manage on your own!”.

With some sadness, you pack your belongings and move into your new home. Your family disown you and you lose contact. Time passes and you decide to visit them to see if tempers have cooled,  but when you turn the corner back into Albion Street, you find that your old house is boarded up, with a “For Sale at Auction” sign. There is no sign of your dysfunctional family, or the lodgers.

All over England, local councils are being ordered by the British government to make cutbacks, even in essential services, because Whitehall is withholding their funding to “balance the books”. The English Radicals believe that the present system where central government keeps all taxation revenue and then rations funding to local authorities is wrong, and should be scrapped. Where does this taxation revenue come from in the first place? From taxpayers all over England! Why should taxes raised in Exeter, Birmingham or Newcastle automatically be sent to that corrupt middleman - the British government in Whitehall - who keep the bulk of that cash and decide what we in the “sticks” should be able to spend? And then they have the audacity to tell us, that we need to make cutbacks? That pile of money they are sat on was ours in the first place!

As outlined in a previous article on this website, the English Radicals believe the whole system of taxation in “broken Britain” is in serious need of overhaul. Instead of all taxation going straight to the British Treasury, it should first pass through the local area where the tax is generated. At least 50% of all revenue should be kept for local government funding, and only then should any remaining revenue be passed on to central government. This system is not new, similar ones exists already in places like Germany and Switzerland, who you may have noticed are weathering the recession much better than we are.

With this system, local government would have more funding than it does now, and central government would have to make do with less – it would have to live within its means, as we do.  And perhaps if the British had less money to play with, they might be less inclined to prop up the EU, go to war, or donate foreign aid to India – a country rich enough to fund a space programme!

If David Cameron is truly serious about creating a “Big Society” (which we doubt), then it will only happen when there is “Smaller Government”. But the Tory Unionists, by definition, are intent on keeping the British government as big as possible – the Home Nations are the last remnants of Empire, and will be kept prisoner at all costs. There will be no help from any of the main parties in securing a fairer deal for English taxpayers, and so our taxes will continue to be taken and misused.

The British government would do well to realise that you can only push people so far before they push back, as the student riots in this country demonstrated, and as recent events have shown in North Africa. And they would do well to remember what the American people told a previous British government in 1776 - that there should be “no taxation without representation” - they were being taxed by the British but had no voice in the British parliament - and we all know how that turned out. The English taxpayer of 2011 is in exactly the same boat as the American of 1776. We pay more tax than ever, but we see our public services diminish – because we have no say in how those taxes are spent. In effect the British government is one of occupation in England, as surely as it ever was in America or Ireland. Seriously - isn't it time England moved out of Albion Street?

The news that hundreds of elderly patients have been starved to death, or otherwise ‘murdered’ by neglect whilst in hospitals, appears to have shocked many people. Why? Abuse and neglect of our elders is now an accepted feature of British society and has been for some time. I remember a Spanish journalist some years back commenting on a British-led campaign to abolish bull-fighting who said: ‘And this from people who mistreat their old people, get your own house in order first’. He had a point. There have been numerous reports over the years showing how older people are regularly let down by the NHS or by local social care services, but the neglect seems to have just got worse. We also know, and appear to accept as a society, that hundreds, if not thousands, of elderly people will die every year because they can’t afford to heat their homes and have to choose between food, or warmth. Even more to the point, every day in the press we read of another sickening assault on some older person, and often in the own home. Many of these attacks are targeted on the elderly; imagine any other sector of the community facing targeted attacks in this way, the outcry would be loud and long.

The shrugged acceptance of this abuse of the elderly seems, on the surface, to be at odds with a society that is super obsessed with appearing correct, and particularly about human rights. We have just witnessed a campaign to give convicted prisoners the vote – because of their human rights. There is another campaign afoot to have sex offenders removed from the register after a period of time – because of their human rights. What about the human rights of the elderly? The obsession with being PC was shown for all its glory when the Sky Sports presenters Andy Gray and Richard Keys were hounded from their jobs because of remarks they made about a female assistant referee off camera. Nobody died here, but both men lost their jobs. How many people have lost their jobs as a result of the abuse of the elderly? And who can accept that the media corporation that owns Sky was championing the rights of women when it also publishes the bloody Sun newspaper! Then, last year do you remember when a lady was prosecuted after being caught dropping a cat into a wheely bin? Terrible cruelty to the poor animal, they all wailed in the media, and she got death threats. Eventually, after a campaign by the RSPCA and animal rights activists (who generally hate humans anyway) the lady was prosecuted for cruelty. How many people were prosecuted for cruelty over the abuse of the elderly? And why is this abuse and neglect acceptable?

The main problem with modern society is that it is geared towards individualism and promotes self-obsession as a way of life. Added to which families and communities are being driven apart by the debts built up from rampant consumerism promoted by government and media alike and don’t have the time, or money, to look after older relatives. This is also a youth-orientated society, and looking young is so fashionable people have surgery to retain it. It would seem that when you get to 50, society is ready to write you off. In the recent unemployment figures much was made of the numbers of those aged 18-24 on the list, nearly a million, but nothing was said about the fact that nearly the same number of over-50s are also unemployed, and many for over 12 months. And how many times have we heard the mantra that we need more young people involved in politics, or in the media? What for?  Young people are a dwindling minority. Add up these factors and they combine to ensure that, for whatever reason, nobody can be bothered with older citizens. They are seen as an inconvenience, a burden. But why?

The over-50s will soon make up the largest part of our population, and certainly the largest part of the electorate. Just think about how obsessed the BBC and other organisations are about making sure their staffing levels ‘reflect our diverse society’(Remember Greg Dyke complaining that the BBC was ‘hideously white’?). Yes, well how many over 50s will they, or other public organisations employ? especially now that the default retirement age has gone and people are expected to work up to 68. By contrast, it is the over-50s who run most of our voluntary organisations and charities. It is the over-50s who act as both a bank and an unpaid childcare service to their younger family members. I work with the over-50s and they are part of a generation that worked from the age of 14 or 15 without a day off or on benefit, often paying high taxes to build the NHS and Welfare State in its infancy; they did not live off credit, but saved for the things they wanted and managed to put money away for the future (and for which they are now penalised by the State). They grew up as part of a society that mucked-in together to build this country up after the worst military conflict of modern times. They didn’t moan about ‘being bored’ but worked hard, brought up families and coped.

Sadly, in return for their years of sacrifice the elderly are treated worst than second-class citizens in ‘yufe’ obsessed, PC-obsessed society. They are taken for granted by everyone around them and expected to pay for everybody else’s selfish lifestyle choice. And the political parties that they thought represented their views are so obsessed with minorities and appeasing the EU, that they feel betrayed every day they turn on the TV. Even more to the point, they see a future of neglect in a nation that has got so used to throwaway consumerism, that it also throws away its elderly. These fears of future neglect are compounded by the scale of government cuts to local council budgets and by the fact that many private social care homes are now making use of the current jobs crisis by forcing its staff to take pay cuts – thus lowering the quality of care provided. Finally, they are confused because they have something to offer and youth-obsessed Britain still treats them as ‘geriatrics’.

So, we need to get rid of this notion that the elderly are a burden. Far from it, the elderly offer knowledge of life, employment skills and a social awareness that is enormously important in our ever-changing world. They also offer an ethos of self-improvement, community spirit and caring that is vital to our society. Given proper investment and support in Adult Education many elderly people could continue to work, even if only part-time, until well into their seventies and even eighties. They could also be paid to mind grandchildren and thus free-up single mums to work. Crucially, in a society that will become dominated by the voluntary sector in the years ahead, the elderly will be the core provider of many local services. Therefore it is important that we value our elderly and, above all, treat them with the same dignity and respect that we would expect ourselves to be treated. They are not a burden, they are our senior citizens and as English Radicals we value their contribution to the building of our modern society and are proud that they choose to become members of our ever-growing movement. 

When the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition took power in 2010 they had one major priority; to transfer as much wealth as possible from the poorest in society to the wealthiest. Naturally, it is no coincidence that members of the coalition government are also amongst those who are the wealthiest in society! Each day brings more evidence of that transfer of wealth. Starting with cutting benefits for the unemployed and disabled; assisted by the Tory media and their hunt for dole scroungers (in communities where 16 or 17 people are chasing every vacancy). This assault on the people is continued by major job losses in the public sector, with all the knock-on effect that will have within the private sector – particularly shops and other small business. But government cynicism is breathtaking. It deliberately creates mass unemployment whilst at the same time penalises people for being unemployed. War has been declared! And now the realisation is beginning to hit home; that life, which has been tough in the past, is about to get worse.

In actual fact, we are now seeing the latest development in a long process that has led to the brutalisation of our communities; a process which began under the last Tory regime with the destruction of our manufacturing and mining industries and caused the devastation of many local areas. This was followed by the decision to allow the flooding of our housing estates with ‘skunk’ marijuana and cheap alcohol, accompanied by the legal system reducing the punishments for those who carry out acts of violence within poorer communities.  Now, the new Justice Secretary Ken Clarke has signalled that, due to cost, very few people will be sent to prison (probably only benefit cheats or those who steal from banks), thus encouraging more crime at a time of reduced police numbers. We can now look forward to a time when our streets will be overrun by a feral youth that has no social or education facilities, no prospects for work, and reduced benefits if registering as unemployed. There will be no police around to stop them from committing crimes; no fire service nearby to extinguish the arson attacks on those who offer resistance, and the nearest hospital will be privatised and refuse to take patients from certain postcodes. In addition to rising crime, there is an attack on the social welfare system; no care services for the elderly and disabled, no meals on wheels, and no respite care for those who look after the vulnerable. There will also be an unprecedented assault on the disabled, with a eugenics-influenced medical company forcing millions of vulnerable people into abject poverty and, possibly, pushing many to suicide or an early death from poor health. Just like the Nazis, this ConDem government has decided that the poor and disabled, the working class youth and the unemployed, are untermensch – subhuman.  Welcome to Cameron’s Reich!    

However, things could now start to get interesting. For thirty years, and even through the dark years of Thatcher, governments have been able to avoid problems from the masses due to the fact that loss of work, and the prestige that went with having a job, was cushioned by housing benefit and invalidity payments. But now the government is seeking to end the benefits cushion without providing employment opportunities, and it is seeing their benefits reduced unfairly that will make people more politically aware than ever before, and risks provoking the sort of backlash that has not been seen since those days in 1981, when Toxteth and Brixton burned.  More to the point, the brutalisation of our youth has an interesting historical precedent. In ancient times the Spartans brutalised their youth as a deliberate policy, and turned them into the finest warriors in Europe (ask the Persians at Thermopylae!). So, the government should be aware that its policy of targeting working class communities could actually backfire, especially if our youth and unemployed are given suitable education and direction by community activists who step into the void left by the State. In other words, don’t step back in horror from the cuts, step up to the plate and make a difference; radicalise our communities!

Finally, let’s not forget that if the ConDems declare war on the people, history teaches us that the people are justified in responding accordingly. As English Radicals we take pride in a political heritage of fighting against tyranny and injustice, and a key moment in this heritage came on 30th January 1649, when King Charles I was executed in Whitehall after having been found guilty of ‘waging war on his people’. This day was a victory for the ordinary people of England who, through their service in the New Model Army, the ‘instrument of the people’, had brought an end to a tyrannical government. Perhaps somebody should remind Cameron and Clegg about what happened in January 1649!

Reducing the number of police officers and knee jerk proposals to Anti Social Behaviour Orders, are the work of a Government completely out of touch with what is happening in England. Ask a pensioner who has suffered repeated acts of anti social behaviour or the mother who has lost a son because of knife crime what they think of the Con-Dem coalition’s plans, and the answer will not be very complimentary.

However it is the victims of anti social behaviour and crime in general the Government should be asking. For too long Home Office officials have remained aloof from the real troubles of this country, protected at the taxpayers expense in their luxurious ivory towers tucked away from the problems on the ground.  Needless to say, when funding is issued for Policing, it is likely the diplomatic protection budget will not be cut, whilst the funding for community policing, or what could be called a community protection budget will be slashed. So much for living in an ‘equal society’.

Last September there were 141,480 police officers, which is just over 2,500 less than the year before. The Government is demanding that police forces cut their budgets by 20 per cent for 2014-15 with over 10,000 officers being cut in the next few years. This includes experienced and highly motivated officers.

Police Federation Chairman Paul Mc.Keever is quoted as saying: "The reality of the consequences of such harsh cuts to the front line is finally hitting home. We have in the past been accused of scaremongering when we voiced our very real concerns. We were not. Such harsh cuts to policing will result in a change for the worst which could compromise public safety."

Through these cutbacks the Con-Dem coalition is offering an open invitation to the criminal classes of this country, and to overseas gangsters who will take advantage of our open EU borders and labour market  to engage in criminal activity here in England.

The fact that only 11% of officers are currently visible to the public is a disgraceful factor which demonstrates the complete mismanagement of our police force by the British Government. Some people refer to CPSO’s as the ‘plastic police’, as their main role is to simply provide a visible uniformed presence on the streets rather than dealing with crime. However it seems 89% of the regular force could be referred to as the ‘pen pusher police’ due to the large number that sit behind desks, hardly venturing onto the streets where real policing should take place.

The rebranding of ASBO’s is another area where the Government is demonstrating a complete lack of judgement. It has been documented that some offenders regarded an ASBO as a badge of honour. Therefore for this element it did not prove to be a worthy deterrent. Figures show 1,266 ASBO’s were breached in 2008, giving a breach rate of over 50%. In total, more than 9,247 of the 16,999 issued were breached.

However, some of the proposals included in its replacement are completely comical. Included in the new ‘Criminal Behaviour Order’ is the confiscation of offender’s mobile phones and iPods. Again this shows how completely out of touch the Government is, as many of these items are likely to have been stolen or bought from the proceeds of illicit gains. Therefore rather than decreasing crime, this measure is likely to see it escalate.

The lack of investment is job creation and securing jobs for the people of England will undoubtedly lead to a lack of honest aspirations and an increase in criminality. Lack of support for community and youth ventures will increase anti social behaviour. One thing is for certain, fewer police + less employment + fewer facilities for young people = more crime and anti social behaviour. Unfortunately when adding up the figures for cutbacks this is one equation the Government has chosen to ignore.

In reality it seems the British Government is showing more concern for the problems of the citizens of Cairo and Kabul than Croydon and Keighley.  Unfortunately this is the record of successive British Government’s concentrating on international policies instead of national priorities.

The English Radical Alliance (ERA) believes national priorities should come first, and in the case of crime and anti social behaviour, it is often the poorest and most vulnerable in society that are the victims. We often hear of human rights being mentioned in far off lands, yet in reality if you are a disabled person in England under attack from gangs of yobs on a nightly basis, your human rights are being abused. This is why we in ERA will always make a point of defending the human rights of the vulnerable and oppressed in this country.

We believe it is wrong that only 11% of police officers are visible to the public, but at the same time we feel it is wrong to reduce the numbers of officers on the frontline. Police officers should be there for policing not paperwork.  Policing should be about dealing with real crime, protecting the public and not hassling people distributing leaflets against the cutbacks. Our vision is for a ‘peoples’ police force, accountable to local people, prioritising where the local people feel it is required, and not under the direction of an ivory tower unaccountable bureaucrat.

Tackling crime on the whole however, requires more than a decent police force. It needs a multi pronged approach. If you do not tackle the root causes of crime, regardless of how many officers are sent to patrol our streets, many people will still turn towards crime and lawlessness. This is why as well as punishments, education, training, job creation, job security and facilities for the community and young people are required to stem the flow towards criminality.

Looking at anti social behaviour, the Government‘s Criminal Behaviour Order states that ‘local agencies will be compelled to take action if five people from five different residences in the same neighbourhood have complained and no action has been taken, or the behaviour in question has been reported to the authorities by an individual three times, and no action has been taken’.

We in the English Radical Alliance ask ‘Why so many times?’ If there is no action after the first report surely that demonstrates that duties (of which are funded by the taxpayer) are being ignored.

Punishment is another area where the people have been let down. All too often it is reported that a vicious thug or habitual criminal receives a lenient sentence, whilst a lesser offender faces a term in jail. Our judicial system requires a complete overhaul, imprisoning those that pose a threat to society and non custodial sentences for those that do not. These should include the use of hard labour and eductaion. Regarding the lack of prisons, we currently have two aircraft-less carriers which will ply the seas of the world or be moth-balled at the taxpayers expense. These vessels could be converted into prison ships, thus ‘defending’ the people of England against crime. In a practical sense, they would probably serve the country better as prison ships than as part of some international operation off the coast of Somalia.

The English Radical Alliance believes the people have suffered enough through neglect and mismanagement of our police force and judiciary. As we have demonstrated, as well as a reduction in the number of officers, cutbacks in other areas such as job creation will lead to an increase in crime. It is time for ushering in of some new, radical thinking, before society as we know it descends into complete chaos and lawlessness.

Our American “special friends” are stalking us like prey again – the US medical giant Johnson & Johnson are apparently trying to buy Hull-based Smith & Nephew for an estimated £7+ Billion, but the S & N board have been trying to keep this news quiet for some reason, despite Takeover Panel rules that require companies to keep investors informed of possible offers. Strange, that…..

If recent acquisitions by American companies are anything to go by, it will pan out something like this: a British bank bailed out by English taxpayers in 2008 will play the role of Judas and lend the Johnson gang the money – the Smith big-wigs will receive huge “golden goodbyes” - all production in England will be phased out and moved abroad - and finally the company will be re-registered in Switzerland where corporation tax is considerably lower than the 28% that the short-sighted British government insists on charging every company that wants to do business here. Everyone in England will suffer as another FTSE 100 company is swallowed up by global capitalists and moved abroad, along with all the revenue and employment it provided. Indeed, a steadily increasing number of British companies have already re-registered in Switzerland, and are saving millions in tax already.

Firstly, we see no sense in foreign companies being allowed to buy out profitable English companies, and English Radical policy would be to limit by law, any and all foreign holdings in English companies to 33%, to prevent these precious assets being stripped away from us. The only possible exception to that rule would be to rescue an English company in severe difficulties - and then only after the workforce had been given the opportunity to buy the company and run it themselves and the Government has considered purchasing a 'Golden Share' to keep the company in business and majority ownership in English hands.

Secondly, the 28% Corporation Tax – a tax on net profits – ensures that British and English companies will always struggle to compete against companies that use cheap labour. So, if you can't  match the labour costs, then you must reduce the tax overhead to attract investment. The English Radicals believe that all taxes on home grown income and profits should be lowered to encourage initiative and productivity (as long as that income and profit stays in England) - whether they be company profits, share dividend payments or worker’s pay -while taxes on consumption should be increased, especially on foreign made goods and services – these twin measures would encourage English production and jobs on the one hand, and encourage people to consume fewer imported products. We've said it before and we'll say it again: England is a massive market of fifty million people – if you want to sell here, make here. You bring the jobs, and we'll buy your products.

Thirdly. why do governments feel the need to charge such high rates of corporation tax in the first place? Because they need revenue like a junkie needs a fix, due to their inefficient, bloated, centralised nature. The “bigger” the government (as in dictatorial and controlling), the bigger the fix has to be. China's corporation tax is 30% - their government controls every aspect of Chinese life, and even in China that level of “big brother” control doesn't come cheap. So, if the British government could get used to the idea of taking a smaller role, and allow local government at county/regional level to take on more responsibilities, they could get by with much less money.

It is also interesting to note that EU aid to Ireland has been conditional on them raising their Corporation Tax rate from 12.5%, one of the lowest in the EU – whilst French, and German (if you add the national and local taxes together) corporation taxes are currently over 30%. Ironic and sad that Ireland fought so hard to gain independence from the chinless British aristocracy, only to have their sovereignty stolen by faceless European bankers a few decades later.

We are no lovers of global capitalism, but we are pro-business – and if we want to attract manufacturing (and therefore wealth creation) back to England, there has to be something in it for the manufacturer. These are our proposals:

Imported products into Britain/England from nations with whom we have large trade deficits to be taxed more heavily than at present. This would limit the present advantage of global capitalists producing in low paid sweatshop economies, and exporting to higher wage economies like our own. We are happy to trade with other nations, but there must be more balance.

Central government to keep 33% of this taxation revenue, the other 67% to be shared out fairly amongst the devolved local county/regional authorities of England.

Foreign owned companies producing in England (eg, Nissan) to pay only 20% CT. (split 50/50 between that local area and national government).

English owned companies producing in England to pay only 10% CT. (split 50/50 between that local area and national government).

English co-operatives producing in England to be exempt from CT altogether.

A tax regime such as the one we propose would once again make it viable for both home grown and foreign companies to set up shop here. Critics may argue that these proposals would result in less corporation tax revenue - but the British government is driving away tax paying businesses altogether, by charging more than it should! Imagine the British government as a landlord whose tenants have discovered cheaper rooms across the road – the Tory's beloved “free market” dictates that in such an event you should drop your rents to compete, or face having no rental income at all.  Which is better - some corporation tax and more employment, or no corporation tax and mass unemployment?

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!

Our ancestors were able to make money in trading, because of one secret – everyone is different. Different peoples and regions, had their own food, drink, clothes, art and raw materials. Some were liked and became world famous, some fell out of favour and exist in history books. The whole system worked because of those differences.

In today's corporate homogenised world, the very things that made areas famous has been diluted and prostituted for profit. We now get Cheddar cheese made in Italy, Scotch whisky made in Japan and China. Goods designed here, but made in China because our highly inventive engineers cost too much. For the corporation, cost and profit are all that matters, humanity and difference means nothing without a bottom line. Difference today decides on whether to go skiing or scuba diving, it's geographical not human.

Yet looking at this kind of world, don't you feel like something is missing? People cheapened because they're different, be it colour, religion, sex or disability. Nobody is above anyone else, nobody should have special laws to protect them, why can't we rely on a basic humanity instead?

People are ground down and used up in the name of profit, highly experienced and skilled people worth less than cheap foreign labour. People disabled fighting for their country are worth less than someone who inherits money and has no personal merits, where clique is worth more than custom, and where basic decency is of no value.

That is the England we have today, it's being made worse by a corrupt party politics. Most parties can't be told apart in the House of Commons, politicians are being given money by foreign powers or corporations to buy favour, yet the democratic votes of the English people are cheapened by such corruption. We are told we're all the same, but we'll give other partly autonomous parts of the UK more than you get, based on some spurious claims made over 30 years ago.

Why can't people buy Cheddar cheese from Cheddar? Why can't we buy local produce that hasn't travelled thousands of miles? Why can't skilled people be paid what they're worth? The answer right now is because our politicians have sold out to the corporation lifestyle, they have formed a class of their own based on how you were born, what school tie you wear and how much you inherited. If I didn't know better I'd think I was in 1020 AD not 2010 AD.

Peter Kay must be quaking in his boots judging by David Cameron's latest “stand up” slot at the Mansion House recently – telling the assembled audience that Britain is still a “world power”. For sheer hilarity, this one liner is up there with: “did you hear the one about the country that built two aircraft carriers, but couldn't afford the planes to go with them?”. And how quaintly predictable that stockbroker's son, and millionaire Old Etonian Cameron should have such a rosy, delusional view of Britain’s place in the world, comfortably coddled as he is in his Cotswolds constituency. 

Down here in the England and Britain where the rest of us live, it seems a much colder, darker, and more dangerous place than the one Cameron resides in – a reality where the British government encourages British companies and utilities to fall into foreign ownership, where either the profits are exported, or the jobs are, to countries where the hourly cost of labour is measured in pence, not pounds.

A Britain that sends poorly equipped soldiers to fight an unwinnable “whack-a-mole” war in Afghanistan, slowly bleeding our troops and our taxpayers dry in the process. 

A Britain that has record crime levels and already faces a chronic shortage of police officers to patrol the streets, but is cutting their numbers still further. A prelude to martial law, perhaps? It happened in Ulster, it's not unthinkable that it could happen on the mainland........

A Britain where the government hacks and slashes at even essential public spending,  but is more than happy to keep subsidising the EU and the Euro – whilst at the same time is unwilling to tackle the real culprits behind Britain's present financial malaise – the Tory sympathisers and globalists in the banking and credit industry.

A Britain where taxpayer's money was used without permission to buy failing banks, but have no say in how they are run, nor receive any profits back from them. What a fantastic business model -  privatised profits and socialised losses! This “generosity” is now being extended to bailing out another country, and another currency, again without the permission of the taxpayer.

A Britain that gives billions more to the EU than it gets back, but also buys twice as much from the EU as it sells back, because of the collapse of our manufacturing base. 

The English Radical Alliance are fed up with posh career politicians like Cameron from adorable picture postcard constituencies “bigging up” Britain on the world stage, whilst ignoring its problems: who even cares if Britain is a world power, when its citizens are too frightened to leave the house after dark for fear of attack by feral teenage gangs, because there are no police within ten miles? Who cares if Britain is “punching above its weight” when the young men doing the punching are coming home in body bags? 

A few years from now, who will even believe Britain is a world power, when our chronic over reliance on Russian gas and French nuclear energy suppliers allows foreign powers to blackmail us economically, when we could so easily be utilising our tidal energy or paying British miners to dig coal out of the ground?

Seriously, Mr Cameron – most British people don't care if Britain is a world power punching above its weight, or not, but:
They would like to feel safe when they go to the shops, and they would like our servicemen returned from Afghanistan and they would like to be out of the EU.

But none of these things are going to happen on your watch, are they? In our eyes, you are already a failed politician - you care more about Britain's image than Britain's people: you truly are the “heir to Blair”. What a wretched, damning epitaph. But what else can you expect, with these comedians running the country?