Priti Patel -
Home Secretary -
Priti Patel was appointed home secretary in Boris Johnson’s first cabinet and has kept her position since then.
A prominent Brexiteer, Ms Patel had previously argued that Mr Johnson was the only person who could save Brexit and the Tories.
She had previously served as Theresa May's international development secretary, until she was forced to quit following a row over unauthorised meetings with Israeli politicians.
She was first elected to the seat of Witham, Essex, in 2010, after working for several years in PR for the Conservative Party, as well as lobbying for tobacco and alcohol industries.
and again Conservative local and national policies reveal
Britain as more of a police
state. Why? Because the truth hurts. And the truth is this
administration is not doing enough of anything in climate and
sustainability terms, other than treading water and milking
their positions of trust for all the 'cash-on-the-side' they can
get from secondary employment, or lining up such employment for
post MP life.
last thing they want is anyone drawing attention to their
failings, such as Insulate
Britain. The last Tory Prime Minister to overstep the line
was Margaret Thatcher. She wanted to apply a property service
tax to people who had no property and so needed no services.
Council Tax is mandatory with no opt out, even if you do not
want their services. To our mind, councils could be replaced
with computer AI, and be fairer and cheaper - taking out the
corruption that is ever present. Planning is one area where
officers and councillors can make a killing doing favours for
developers. Putting up house prices, and taking them beyond the
reach of young families starting out. So perpetuating the UK's
renting society and financial slavery - that is the hallmark of
Conservative governments. Such exploitation being how the
British Empire blossomed, into embers as a remnant Commonwealth.
Possibly turning to ashes, as global warming heats things up.
right to object and voice opinions is enshrined in Articles 9
and 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998. Insulate Britain and Extinction
Rebellion are the Suffragettes of our time. Without the
right to voice opinions, we will become a Police State proper,
climbing another rung up the fascist ladder to dictatorship.
Soon we'd be back to Henry
the Eighth days, at 4.3 beheadings a day, during his tyrannical
reign. Making Adolf Hitler look like a saint.
THATCHER - One of the last great boobs by the
Conservatives, was when Maggie dropped a clanger, trying to
wring more cash out of the population, regardless of their
social situation. This led to her demise. If you try and take
away the rights of a person to protest with draconian laws right
out of Adolf Hitler's dictatorship handbook, your will drive
protest movements underground, force them to wear masks and
maybe introduce violence into the equation, where previously
demonstrations had been peaceful. We might then see climate
bombings and such like.
if everyone protested and got jailed. First off there are not
enough prison beds. Secondly, the workforce would evaporate, and
that means no taxes, so no money to pay our national debt, or
the politicians who are acting like climate jerks. The fact is
that attempts to quash dissent by making it illegal to express
oneself, is another step to dictatorship. Measures to obtain
such powers without proper debate, are deceitful. We need the
right to protest to remain enshrined as a right, to tell out of
touch politicians when they are getting it wrong - without
Tory ministers have been blasted for trying to pass “outrageous” new anti-protest laws at a late stage of a Bill.
Priti Patel’s Home Office was accused of a “naked attack on civil liberties” over measures proposed in a midnight Lords debate.
New offences would impose up to a year’s jail on protesters who lock themselves to railings, gates or other objects.
They would impose similar terms on activists who “wilfully” obstruct highways or the construction of major works like HS2.
Courts would get powers to impose “prevention orders” on protesters’ future behaviour, even if they’re not convicted of a crime.
[A violation of Article 6 in itself, where everyone is entitled
to a fair hearing] And police would get sweeping new powers to stop and search protesters, even without suspicion a crime was committed.
An officer above a certain rank could search anyone if they “reasonably believe” an offence “may be committed” nearby.
Such offences could include chaining oneself to a gate, blocking a road or “intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance”.
Home Office minister Baroness Williams said the offences were needed to stop the “reckless and selfish tactics” of groups like Insulate Britain.
But a leading human rights barrister branded the new powers “sinister” while Labour said they were “unacceptable”.
Ministers were criticised for attaching them to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, which MPs have already approved.
The amendments were raised in the House of Lords, meaning they will get a vote by MPs if passed, but only in last-minute “ping-pong” rather than going into detailed scrutiny.
Baroness Williams withdrew the amendments from an early hours debate on Thursday in the face of peers’ fury.
But she warned she will re-table them in a new Lords debate in a few weeks.
She told peers recent events showed “the balance between the rights of protesters and the rights of others tips far too far in favour of the protesters".
She added: "We cannot have sections of our transport infrastructure or other critical infrastructure brought to a halt by a small group of protesters, whatever their cause.
"We accept some level of disruption is to be accepted and tolerated from protest action, but there is a line to be drawn.
"Insulate Britain, Extinction Rebellion and others have overstepped that line."
She added: "This suite of new measures is necessary to protect the public from the unacceptable levels of disruption we have seen as a result of the reckless and selfish tactics employed by some protest organisations in recent weeks.”
HENRY VIII - During his time on the throne, the
English King is thought to have beheaded around 57,000 subjects, earning him a reputation as a butcher. Though he was not referred to as: "Henry the Butcher," many believe that such a title is well deserved. Of course he did not swing the axe himself. He employed a professional axe-man for that. Giving us the term
"getting axed," as in being fired from a job, and
"Off with his head." Being a latter day reference to
the Kings butchery.
Between 1509 and 1547,
English subjects lost their heads at the rate of 4.34 subjects a day. It was a violent time in history, but Henry VIII may have been particularly bloodthirsty, executing tens of thousands during his 36-year reign. By comparison, the daughter who succeeded him on the throne, who came to be called "Bloody
Mary (Tudor)," killed fewer than 300 people during her six years as queen. Only 50 executions a year, or one a week to satisfy her bloodlust, compared to 30 a week under Henry. England could hardly be described as merry.
One of the primary reasons for Henry VIII's notoriety is not the sheer volume of killings but, instead, the controversy surrounding them.
He lived to 55, thankfully cutting short his reign of terror.
Mary Tudor was far less bloodthirsty.
But human rights barrister Adam Wagner said: “These amendments hugely increase the power of the police and public authorities to prevent protests, disrupt activities at protests and restrict the activities of protesters.
“As always with laws restricting freedom of speech, it is useful to imagine them being used to prevent the expression of views you care deeply about.
“These laws are so generalised they could seriously disrupt any protest movement, if the government or police want to.”
He said they will “very significantly limit the right to protest”, adding: “The government will say these are a response to Insulate Britain but in reality these are aimed at any large-scale disruptive protest.”
Lib Dem peer Lord Paddick, a former senior Met Police officer, said the “outrageous proposals” introduced “in a wholly unacceptable way at the last minute”.
Labour peer Baroness Chakrabarti said it “tastes to me a lot like anti-terror legislation of the kind that I have always opposed as being disproportionate and counterproductive."
Green Party peer Baroness Jones said: "This is nothing more than a naked attack against civil liberties and a crackdown on protest and we must oppose it for both what it is and how it's been done."
Shadow attorney general Lord Falconer accused the government of “excluding debate” by introducing 18 pages of new law at a late stage of the Bill.
Labour frontbencher Lord Kennedy condemned Insulate Britain tactics but added: “This is no way to do business.”
He added: “Although we are responding to one particularly crass protest, the law being debated would not just apply to that one crass protest but all peaceful protests.”
Pressing the Government to "temper" the measures, he said: "I think at the moment they are totally unacceptable”.
CHANNEL DROWNINGS - At a vigil in London on Thursday evening outside the Home Office, people remembered the 27 people who
died attempting to seek asylum in the UK, after the sinking of
Some spoke of a hostile environment for refugees and migrants, while others drew comparisons with the deaths at sea and the Essex incident of 2019, which saw the suffocation of 39 Vietnamese migrants trying to enter the UK via a refrigerated truck.
But as people chanted slogans of “nobody is illegal” and “no borders, no nations”, more refugees were reported to have left the ports of Calais and Dunkirk by boat on Thursday night, hoping to find a better life.
They may we be disillusioned.
The International Organizations for Migration (IOM) says about 200 people have died on the route this year.
The UK says more than 25,000 undocumented people have arrived so far this year, three times as many as last year’s figure.
France and England have promised to step up measures to stem migration
flow, but on Friday 19th November, France dis-invited Priti
Patel to a meeting on the crisis, with Paris angry over a letter tweeted by UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson to French President Emmanuel Macron.
by the UK's response to peaceful protestors, many people would
not be surprised to see the Tories asking for legal powers to
arrest immigrants and detain them in prison for umpteen years,
or allow British warships to machine gun boats carrying refugees
as they seek to escape from whichever hell hole they came from,
by treating them as suspected spies or terrorists. The constitutional foundation for
Adolf Hitler's dictatorship was the Enabling Act on March 24, 1933. It gave
the Fuehrer the right to pass any law without the approval of the Reichstag.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson carried out a reshuffle of his
24 cabinet members on Wednesday (15 September 2021), removing several key ministers.
in the other posts? Below is a guide to the people that make up Mr
Johnson's cabinet, with the latest new faces. The burning question is, will it
make any difference to Britain's performance on the world climate stage. Or
will they be feathering their nests and fiddling on their violins, while the
Following the abysmal result from COP26, all that can be said
is, the cabinet need to scratch their heads a little more, stop taking
second jobs - that deprives their constituents of MP time, or time that
should be spent thinking on COP27 (set for Egypt) and saving lives. And of
course, developing a sustainable
Accordingly, the countries assume commitments to build up efforts for reduction of
energy consumption based on unabated coal and abandonment of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies.
Nearly 200 countries have made an unprecedented and historic pledge to speed up the end of fossil fuel subsidies and coal at the COP26 climate summit, where India pushed through an 11th hour intervention to weaken the language on coal.
So nailing their colours to the mast.
Crucially, despite almost a fortnight’s negotiations that ran more than 24 hours late, the 196 countries meeting in Glasgow committed to issuing stronger 2030 climate plans next year in a bid to avert dangerous
Pledges at COP26 are expected to see Earth warm 2.4°C this century, better than the predicted 2.7°C predicted before the summit but still a rise that would bring extreme climate impacts and see countries overshoot their shared goals of 1.5°C and “well below” 2°C.
The promise to “revisit and strengthen” new plans by the end of 2022 means the UK government hosting the summit can credibly claim to have delivered its aim of “keeping alive” the 1.5°C target. “It is a big moment,” says Chris Stark of the
Climate Change Committee, an
independent group that advises the UK government.
Fresh plans submitted next year for curbing emissions in 2030 must be aligned with the 1.5°C goal, an important new requirement that means those governments who fall short will have to justify why to their citizens. Australia,
Indonesia are among many countries whose existing plans are inadequate and will need to be strengthened.
Until today, coal and fossil fuel subsidies have never been explicitly mentioned in 26 years of treaties and decisions at UN climate talks, despite coal being one of the key drivers of global warming and $5.9 trillion of subsidies being given annually to coal,
oil and gas.
The language in COP26’s final decision text, now known as the Glasgow Climate
Pact, sees countries agree to “accelerating efforts” on the phase-out of “inefficient” subsidies. In a dramatic last-minute intervention, minutes before the outcome was adopted, India proposed a watered-down version of the language on coal, changing “phasing down” of
coal rather than “phasing out.”
DIRTIEST DOZEN G20 - COAL, GAS & OIL GUZZLERS - COP OUTS.
von der Leyen
Mohammed bin Salman
abusers will say they had no choice. They needed to keep
burning coal, gas
and oil for their economies - just like the camp guards at the
many concentration camps in WWII, they were forced into business as
usual. In the case of the camp guards, they argued they were
just following orders. But that is not true. We all have
choices. There are clean alternatives, such as solar
power. There is no need to keep building coal
generating stations, and no need to drive carcinogenic petrol
or diesel vehicles that contribute
to between 7-8 million deaths a year from lung
cancer. We have hydrogenfuel
you are going to increase electricity capacity, it makes sense
to invest in renewable
energy, unless it is that the fossil
fuel giants are lubricating the works with party
If that is the case, we say that such contributions should be
transparently declared, that the public is informed as to what
is guiding policy decisions.
Note: BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) is a term widely used in the UK to describe people of non-white descent, as defined by the Institute of Race Relations.
The make-up of the cabinet has also changed with all the comings and
goings. There are two more women then there had been before the reshuffle, but the proportion has stayed about the same because the overall number of people attending cabinet has also increased slightly.
As for the education of those now in cabinet, about 63% of them went to private schools, down slightly when compared to Mr Johnson's previous reshuffle last year - but still a stark contrast to his
predecessor's. Just 30% of Theresa May's first cabinet in 2016 attended independent schools, which was fewer than both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's original cabinets.
According to the Sutton Trust social mobility charity, every prime minister since 1937 who attended university was educated at Oxford - except for Mr
Brown. At 43%, Mr Johnson's new cabinet has slightly fewer members who were educated at Oxford or Cambridge compared to his last reshuffle - but it's still more than double what is was in Tony Blair's first cabinet in 1997.
is no fault of Bozo, that Australia, China, India, Russia and
USA have refused to cease using coal in the near future (2030-
2040), but they did sign the Glasgow
Those countries with
fossil fool policies are too
entrenched in carcinogenic fuels to save around two hundred and
forty 240,000,000 million lives from 2030 to 2050. This figure
is based on current death statistics from lung cancer and
related respiratory diseases, that are likely to rise as earth's
temperature increases. This does not include projected deaths
from heat stroke, starvation, thirst and displacement.