You are in the
company of
Roger Warren Evans
Roger Warren Evans
|
|
You are in the
company of
Roger Warren Evans |
|
| Part of www.LivePolitics.net < Back to Home Page |
NewLiving Diary Index
|
item0081B 1112, 1113 1112 27 September 2005 Notice of Removal Part of letter to Home Secretary Charles Clarke, about asylum administration
This deployment of violence and terror is entirely unjustified. The "dawn raid" system of administration is without any humane justification: it is an act of terror, "pour encourager les autres", designed to promote voluntary repatriation. It is wrong in principle, unnecessary functionally, and a breach of the "rights of home" of thousands - under Article 8(2) of the ECHR. The overwhelming majority of failed asylum-seekers, if given the courtesy of (say) a 21-day written notice of removal would "surrender to their bail" peacefully and honestly. Particularly those with children. And that is what you should do. You should give to your fellow human being the common courtesy of a notice period, in which to take their leave of friends and arrange their affairs. If they did not then meet your officers at the appointed time, that failure could be made a serious criminal offence, attracting imprisonment and forcible deportation where appropriate. That would massively reduce the sense of fear and insecurity that is currently plaguing the lives of failed asylum-seekers. It would give the UK a system of asylum administration consistent with civil and human rights principles.
What do you think? Drop me a line
1113 19 September 2005 Flat Tax
This debate has blossomed, and is now said to be the "coming idea" of the New Right. Angela Merkel is a convert, in Germany, and the idea has "miraculously" been adopted by several emerging Eastern European market economies. So the story runs... How short are political memories! Which was the first country to pioneer a "flat" rate of income tax, in the 1920s? You've guessed it: the Soviet Union. There was a standard-rate of 10% Income Tax, accompanied by a flat rate of 10% for compulsory savings.
In our modern Western States, in which unacceptable disparities of wealth continue to disfigure our societies, and in which wealth unashamedly purchases political power, the flat tax would merely play into the hands of the wealthy.
What do you think? Drop me a line
|
|
|
| Created by GMID Design & Communication COPYRIGHT
NOTICE
|
Thirdly,
you should think again about Home Office removal methods. The present
system assumes deceit and dishonesty on behalf of the failed asylum-seeker.
In most cases, no notice is given of removal plans, and failed
asylum-seekers are commonly seized without notice, by wholly inappropriate
Police squads (usually armed) swooping in the early hours of the morning.
This practice strikes terror into the lives of tens of thousands every day,
every morning at six.
But
that was in a society in which the primary source of State income was the
ownership of all industry and all land. The Soviet State was funded
principally by the fruits of nationalisation, which was the essence of the
Communist solution. The flat rate of income tax was of some symbolic
importance, certainly; but in a society in which there were few rich
people, and where wealth certainly did not buy power, the tax rate was not
a key political issue.