Muhammad Haque London Commentary about the paralysis of democratic accountability in Britain as published on the NEW STATESMAN

Muhammad Haque London Commentary about the paralysis of democratic accountability in Britain as published on the NEW STATESMAN website at 1348 GMT Monday 04 April 2011.

That Commentary is n response to the NEW STATESMAN piece by OLLY GRENDER a Lib Dem party ex-employee as a publicity ‘expert’ now having a sub-career as an apparently accessible part of the propaganda war on behalf of the CONDEM COLLUSION.

QUOTE MUHAMMAD HAQUE to OLLY GRENDER:

Your recent career has been a transparently positive one, as an insider expert whose appearances on the election linked broadcast media slots have been solely based on your erstwhile job! However, you are failing to face up to the truth: the crisis is NOT because of the alleged and or claimed differences between the ‘main’ [numerically relevant] ‘Political’ Parties, it is because there really is no difference when the various services as empirically objectively consistently tested on the ground at points of contact between the supposed deliverer of service and the ‘citizen’.

Empirical evidence verified this very afternoon, in the past 40 minutes in Tower Hamlets IN CONTEXT, confirms that there is no democratic accountability at work at any level of the maintained [that is publicly- paid for] agencies including in the actualities of the contacts [as defined above] with the "elected" local Council. I say Tower Hamlets for a very good reason: it is going to become one of the most cited names of an inner city area in England in the coming period when the poverty-creation programme being carried on under the CONDEM COLLUSION begins to hit where it will hurt even more than it did under the Blair and the Brown years.

On all measures known to students of analysis and evidence, the 'welfare state' typified now by the NHS and the Department for Want and Poverty creation [ =DWP] has been failing because the real agenda setters who wield the real powers in the name of the people in this society never wanted it to succeed.

Face it. This is the truth.

Had they wanted it to, they would have made sure that there were accessible, tangible and transparent audit, accountability and honesty built into the processes.

Instead, there is wanton and brazen self serving going on at all levels of the bureaucracies. And inevitably, there are massive failures at every point. It does not require a person to be all that clever to find faults. So the two agencies get kicked under the given regime. This analysis can be extrapolated so easily to take in the schools, the colleges and the universities and the legal trade as well as the Police and the seriously malfunctioning courts of law.

The crisis is one of the whole society. What kind of society do the majority want? Well, there is a problem finding an answer to this question too.

With AV being peddled as furiously now as the word ‘change’ was being promoted by Nick Clegg after that launch via the Granada TV, there may not be an answer as to the majority! Society is not broken. Society is soon to vanish into institutionalised electoral confusion! Bank on that!

UNQUOTE MUHAMMAD HAQUE to OLLY GRENDER:

WE BEGIN OUR EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCE OF STARVATION in Tower Hamlets - 1

0755 [0740] [0715] [0650] Hrs GMT London Monday 04 April 2011. AADHIKAROnline © Muahmmad Haque London Commentary.
On 28 March 2011, two days after the 26 March demonstration in London against “CONDEM CUTS”, one of the most ferocious, persistent and poisonous supporters of the war on the people of Iraq stood up in the UK House of Commons and pretended to be concerned for the welfare of the poor ‘at home’. So much so that he was allowed to make a statement faking it all the while and actually uttering a boast which showed that as far as he was concerned CUTS meant INCREASES! As is the RECORD, the UK House of Commons is not known for allowing a genuinely democratic audit of Cabinet ministers. So what took place on 28 March 2011 was another charade that was taken up by the likes of Gove making banal statements that added nothing to the sum of knowledge about the impact that the cuts that he was part of executing would have on the already deeply impoverished people and families in the inner cities and the counterparts locations and situations in society in Britain. But then how could he utter otherwise? After all, it was Michael Gove who along with the [‘Liberal’ !] Guardian’s widely-described ‘policy-maker’ Polly Toynbee and their fellow war propagandists Janet Daley and David Aaronovitch made such a very serious contribution to selling the lie that waging war on innocent people had to be done! These four were among the most vitriolic attackers - over the key Blair-GW Bush war years on Iraq - of overall societies and people in the countries that Blair and Bush invaded. So how is it that anyone, including Andy Burnham [who was himself exposed as a world class idiot after he was forced to apologise to a lobby interest operating in Britain, after he made a defamatory suggestion about David Davis and late night phone calls] expected Gove to become “naturally human and feel empathetic with the targets of the attacks” that Gove had been a long time planner of?
In any case, how could a latter day de facto practitioner of the art of propaganda that is so often associated with Joseph Goebbles as the master of, be expected to tell the truth about anything?
What would Gove know of involuntary impoverishment of families? Families which the SUNDAY EXPRESS described [20 March 2011] in some detail as having to raise children who were going hungry ?
What would Gove know of the fundamental contradictions in the job that is done by the man in Tower Hamlets who says he has been employed in poverty creation for the past 30 years ?
How would someone of Michael Gove’s ignorance and perniciousness distinguish between poverty creation and poverty? Between lack of jobs and being work shy? Between the people held prisoner in their own homes in estates after criminally silenced estates across the inner city deprived East London borough of Tower Hamlets? Between the role played by ALL the state agencies in the borough that are paid handsomely IN THE NAME of delivering services to the community actually and routinely failing and even refusing to do their jobs and agencies who are in fact made up of employees doing the jobs to their communities? What “elected” “representative” of which constituency in Tower Hamlets would tell Gove the truth when the dominant consideration, factor, influence in both [“Parliamentary”] constituencies [in Tower Hamlets] is that of the “elected” ones belonging with the raging grouping and or the grouplet that keeps only functioning as based on its hatred of their rivals in the community?
How would any one know the truth when there is no one looking for the truth in Tower Hamlets? Or are they?
Is that why Gove felt confident before he uttered a statement to MPs on 28 March 2011 that contained the following fabrication?

“Tower Hamlets continues to be among the best-funded local authorities for students between the ages of five and 16, why Tower Hamlets will benefit disproportionately from the pupil premium...”

Setting the scene with a MUHAMMAD Haque London Commentary commentary published on 20 March 2011 on Richard Desmond's SUNDAY EXPRESS dated 20 March 20

Setting the scene with a MUHAMMAD Haque London Commentary commentary published on 20 March 2011 on Richard Desmond's SUNDAY EXPRESS dated 20 March 2011


1850 [1845] [1830] [1800] Hrs GMT
London
Sunday
20 March 2011.
By © Muhammad Haque.
The strange thing is that the Richard Desmond-ed SUNDAY EXPRESS has shown ‘awareness’ of something that it is usually in denial of. POVERTY in Britain. So why is the SUNDAY EXPRESS running the front page story today about the country being in starvation: “UK BEGINS TO STARVE”?
Is it part of Desmond’s state of mind that is doing it?
That he cannot bear to mention either Libya or Muammar Gaddafi without feeling unwell? So powerful is the hatred of Gaddafi in Desmond’s ‘journalistic culture’ [!!!!] that he is forced to accept the bit of the truth about the really horrible agenda that the CONDEM COLLUSION in the UK is all about: to CREATE MORE POVERTY in Britain!
Desmond has not personally signed the piece as such. But his true agenda is behind the SUNDAY EXPRESS diversion. The SUNDAY EXPRESS does NOT represent the rights of people who are already in poverty. Nor has it any true evidential ground to claim to have conducted a sustained and consistent campaign to expose the real villains who cause poverty and who keep poverty going as part of the agenda of corrupt politics that the SUNDAY ENDERS shores up and backs.
The DESMOND-owned ‘newspaper and media’ outlets are among the worst offenders who daily violate the universally recognisable; rights of the people who are pushed into poverty involuntary.
Hence the cheap, dishonest and misleading and untruthful tales peddled by these outlets; that paint the people in involuntary poverty as being willingly so.
The DESMOND ‘media’ outlets also conceal the evidence that would in fact expose such villains as David Fraud [currently engaged in perpetrating a morality-free act of robbing the people of their rights to dignity and decency] to be a political careerist and opportunistic defrauder of the rights of millions of people who are and have been in involuntary poverty, destitution in Britain for years and even longer. So long as DESMOND – or for that matter the ‘rest’ of ‘Fleet Street’ – keep shielding the real villains [the placemen and placewomen as ministers in CONDEM and in other varieties of ‘Government’ who in fact front the even realler [there is another coinage by your diagnostic commentator] agenda-setters namely the Big Business Military Industrial Complex and their assortments of agents, stooges across both ‘Whitechapel’ and in local agencies including inside the locally “elected” Councils, and regional assemblies] there cannot be the environment that is very urgently needed whereby the democratic voices of the people thus economically disenfranchised can be effectively, sustainably and credibly heard and the appropriate rules, regulations and legislation can be put in place and updated so that there is no denial of rights, no hunger, no destitution and most emphatically no starvation.
The DESMOND media will NOT campaign for such change either centrally or via the elected House of Commons or the elected charades of regional assemblies or indeed their still ‘continuing’ local boroughs and or parish versions .
With the DESMOND-like agenda being pursued by the “rest’ of “Fleet Street’, STARVATION in Britain will not only continue but it will get wider spread than the SUNDAY EXPRESS splash recognises today.
[To be continued]

Diagnostic updater commentary on the tottering CONDEM Collusion that has lost track of common sense too. Quiet Man IDS is outrageously loud & IDIOTIC

0230 [0215] [0210] Hrs GMT
London
Monday
04 April 2011.
AADHIKAROnline © Muhammad Haque London Commentary.

CONDEM’s Want and Poverty-creation minister Iain Duncan Smith is the really vulnerable one in the tottering cabinet kept marginally afloat by the bullying pair.
IDS’ vulnerability is to scrutiny. On evidence, he will fall. He must fall. He cannot stand. We shall be exposing his lying streak here and on associated sites in the days, weeks and months to come. They [The CONDEM Collusion] are bullying the most vulnerable in society in terms of economic and social needs and rights. However, their adventure is set to explode in their faces.
Contrary to the contrivance of confidence by the VERY vincible Cable on the BBC on Sunday 03 April 2011], the corruptly complicit CONDEM is going to come apart because its real assumption - that ordinary people are better off than they actually are - is going to be shown up as the sham and the fraudulent lie that it is.
This lie is particularly fraudulent in view of the fact that a significant part of its contents are the products of a very dishonest Right-wing and ideologically driven fanatic careerist not unfamiliar to David Fraud, the man that has been foisted on the DWP because David Fraud could not answer any of the key questions about evidence about his ‘crusading’ zeal against the people below the poverty line in Britain. More on david Fraud here and on our associated sites soon.
All objective indices and measures show that the IDEOLOGY of attacking the ordinary people[le in society cannot pay. But the Bullies that front and dominate the ramp COLLUSION are not prepared to look at their behaviour in a rational way. They are by their very ideology social thugs and louts.
They want to deprive the deprived and they want to rob the looted. Nothing short of stark acton will stop them. That stark action starts with the truth. [To be continued]

Quoting the SCOTSMAN Online Edinburgh SCOTLAND



Benefits: Poorest may suffer

Published Date: 04 April 2011
By Staff Reporter
GOVERNMENT plans to reform council tax benefit are set to remove £50 million from support for some of Scotland's poorest families.
Radical new proposals in the Welfare Reform Bill will see council tax benefit chopped by 10 per cent, which critics warn will disproportionately hit Scotland.

However, even more controversial plans to devolve it to Holyrood and English councils could mean that some families will lose the benefit altogether.

The proposal would mean that the money which used to be automatically passed on to claimants would no longer be ringfenced and councils could decide whether to pay it out.

While it will make it easier for any attempt to replace the council tax in Scotland with another local tax, it means that thousands of families may find that they are no longer exempt from paying.

The issue has been raised by Glasgow Central Labour MP Anas Sarwar, who is serving on the welfare reform bill committee, looking over the legislation.

He argues that the benefit should be wrapped up into the new universal credit being set up by Tory Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith to replace most other benefits.

He said: "The proposed changes to council tax benefit haven't been thought through and pose particular risks for Scotland. By devolving it to local authorities it goes against the principle of simplicity of the universal credit, reduces transparency on individual financial benefits and creates a postcode lottery of entitlements and benefits."

But a Department for Works and Pensions spokeswoman said: "We want to localise council tax benefit so local councils can better target help and support to those that need it whilst ensuring the most vulnerable in their communities are protected."