item0080D  1106, 1107

Family Respect 

This is a “model” letter, intended to be adapted by each writer, to reflect personal circumstances and concerns.  If each letter could be “topped and tailed” with personal wording, its power would be greatly increased.  The heavy type represents the core of the protest case: other italicised phrases could be included or omitted, according to personal experience, judgment and style. 

Ø      NB The Home Office has a dedicated E-mail address for communications with Ministers…..Ø      public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

To: The Home Secretary Charles Clarke MP  
Home Office  
2 Marsham Street 
London SW1P 4DF

Dear Home Secretary 

Respecting Family Rights

[personalised first paragraph – explaining personal background, experience, qualifications, Party membership or other relevant matters]

The UK has until now respected family rights and upheld children’s interests.  For asylum-seeking families with children, even after the end of their asylum proceedings, cash benefits have in practice been maintained and residential disruption avoided.  That is a decent and sensible position, of which we can all be proud.

Section 9 of the 2004 Act abandons that position.  It empowers you to withdraw financial support from parents who have not made arrangements to return voluntarily to the countries from which they have fled; and it empowers local authorities to provide separate support for the children, if they are taken into care. 

The aim of the Act is literally to terrify parents into a “voluntary” return – terrified by very threat of the removal of their children into care.   [ Not least, these provisions are inconsistent with the statutory duties of child care agencies to ensure the welfare of children “within their families”, under the Childrens Act 1989. ]

[ These new laws are already causing great anguish in Greater Manchester, where you are “piloting” these powers. ]   [ And the mere existence of Section 9 is indeed already bringing terror to many families, throughout the UK ] 

[ Such methods are unacceptable, in a civilised society. Many may accept the Government’s policy objectives, in seeking to maximise voluntary repatriation; yet others would say that Parliament is in any event entitled to adopt such a stance.  But whatever the policy objective, these methods are unacceptable. ]

This targeted threat to break up families and disrupt family life is an unacceptable means of law enforcement, for any civilised Government.

[ In this case, Parliament got it wrong.  You have the power to put it right, by refusing to make use of these awful powers.  I ask you to suspend the operation of Section 9, by public declaration, before it is too late.  Parliament should think again.]

[  Final paragraph in own words ]

End.

 < Back to Home Page

From: Michael Moore
To:  My Fellow Americans who voted for George W. Bush

On this, the fourth anniversary of 9/11, I'm just curious, how does it feel?  How does it feel to know that the man you elected to lead us after we were attacked went ahead and put a guy in charge of the Federal Emergencies Agency whose main qualification was that he ran horse shows?

I really want to know -- and I ask you this in all sincerity and with all due respect -- "How do you feel about the utter contempt Mr. Bush has shown for your safety?"  C'mon, give me just a moment of honesty. Don't start ranting on about how this disaster in New Orleans was the fault of one of the poorest cities in America. Put aside your hatred of Democrats and liberals and anyone with the last name of Clinton. Just look me in the eye and tell me our President did the right thing after 9/11 by naming a horse show runner as the top man to protect us in case of an emergency or catastrophe.

I want you to put aside your self-affixed label of Republican/conservative born-again/capitalist/ditto-head/right-winger and just talk to me as an American, on the common ground we both call America.

When you look at Michael Chertoff, the head of Homeland Security, a man with little experience in national security, do you feel secure?

When men who never served in the military and have never seen young men die in battle send our young people off to war, do you think they know how to conduct a war? Do they know what it means to have your legs blown off for a threat that was never there?

Do you really believe that turning over important government services to private corporations has resulted in better services for the people?

With the nation's debt at an all-time high, do you think tax cuts for the rich are still a good idea? Will you give yours back so hundreds of thousands of homeless in New Orleans can have a home?

It would take ANOTHER day before the President would do a flyover in his jumbo jet, peeking out the widow at the misery 2500 feet below him as he flew back to his second home in DC. It would then be TWO MORE DAYS before a trickle of federal aid and troops would arrive. This was no seven minutes in a sitting trance while children read "My Pet Goat" to him. This was FOUR DAYS of doing nothing other than saying "Brownie (FEMA director Michael Brown), you're doing a heck of a job!"

My Republican friends, does it bother you that
we are the laughing stock of the world?

And on this sacred day of remembrance, do you think we honor or shame those who died on 9/11 2001? If we learned nothing and find ourselves today every bit as vulnerable and unprepared as we were on that bright sunny morning, then did the 3,000 die in vain?

Our vulnerability is not just about dealing with terrorists or natural disasters.  We are vulnerable and unsafe because we allow one in eight Americans to lives in horrible poverty.  We accept an education system where one in six children never graduate and most of those who do can't string a coherent sentence together.  The middle class can't pay the mortgage or the hospital bills and 45 million have no health coverage whatsoever.

I have an idea, and it isn't a horse show.

Yours

What do you think?  Drop me a line