Hi there
Many thanks to Sydenham Town for creating this forum for us all to discuss the forthcoming general election.
I would like to introduce myself as the Lib Dem candidate for Lewisham West and invite residents of the constituency to ask questions or give comments about issues of concern in the area, or on Lib Dem policies. I shall do my best to give an answer or view, and perhaps we may able to get some sensible debate going.
Regards
Alex Feakes
LibDem Introductions
Alex, as a long time Labour voter who can't bring himself to vote for them again after all that has happened in the past few years, I guess I am one of those people who the Lib Dems should be targeting. I have no intention of voting Conservative. So I guess my main concern is highlighted by a recent Labour comment - "Whatever promises they make the one thing you can be sure of is that a vote for the Liberal Democrats would only help Michael Howard into No 10 through the back door." I shudder to think of the possibility of the Tories gaining power on the back of disillusioned Labour supporters jumping ship to the Lib Dems.
Also, how do you respond to the Tory accusation that your party would be soft on crime, would increase taxes, oppose controlled immigration and are "in favour of giving away more power to Europe"?
Also, how do you respond to the Tory accusation that your party would be soft on crime, would increase taxes, oppose controlled immigration and are "in favour of giving away more power to Europe"?
I will only vote for a prospective local councillor or MP who is going to be active locally on behalf of their constituents. Many local voters will share my view. So why should I vote for you (Alex Feakes, Lib Dem candidate for Lewisham West) when you've never, to my knowledge, been involved in one local campaign, never been a regular attender of the Forest Hill or Sydenham Regeneration Forums or an active member of a local pressure group like the Sydenham Society? You may have some good national policies but you simply can't just parachute yourself into a community because there's an election on having sat on your backside for five years. You've got to earn votes by hard, often unglamorous work between elections. I'm not falling for this absurd view that it's a good idea to vote Liberal Democrat as a protest against Labour. For all their faults the Labour Party are the only political organisation who've been active in this area for the last twenty years and for that reason alone they are going to get my vote.
On a point of fact - how do you parachute into a constituency you already live in? (Catford is his address according to his website).nasaroc wrote: You may have some good national policies but you simply can't just parachute yourself into a community because there's an election on having sat on your backside for five years.
Good question to ask what he has done in the past five years in Lewisham...
Charles Kennedy supporting Ian Huntley's right to vote
I first thought this was a wind-up until I saw it.
Charles Kennedy wants to give convicted and imprisoned killers the vote.
And I thought they were confident on getting votes the normal way!
This is what he said on Channel 5 on Wednesday 3 March. See and hear for yourself:
http://newgolddream.dyndns.info/criminal.html
Charles Kennedy wants to give convicted and imprisoned killers the vote.
And I thought they were confident on getting votes the normal way!
This is what he said on Channel 5 on Wednesday 3 March. See and hear for yourself:
http://newgolddream.dyndns.info/criminal.html
-
stone-penge
- Posts: 292
- Joined: 5 Nov 2004 14:40
- Location: Newlands park
Re: Charles Kennedy supporting Ian Huntley's right to vote
heres an idea for you lewkip, tell us about your partys OWN policys instead of slagging off other parties ideas, it might make you sound less like the 'fringe nutters' your party is portrayed as.Lewkip wrote:I first thought this was a wind-up until I saw it.
Charles Kennedy wants to give convicted and imprisoned killers the vote.
And I thought they were confident on getting votes the normal way!
This is what he said on Channel 5 on Wednesday 3 March. See and hear for yourself:
http://newgolddream.dyndns.info/criminal.html
Be careful, stonepenge, he'll be telling you to watch your step in a minute 
I guess if you're faced with the thankless task of being UKIP's candidate for Lewisham West, why not just spend your time having a go at other people's policies?
On a more constructive note, I found the following Q&A, which consists of Charles Kennedy answering questions from the public - worth a look if only to give some much needed balance on this site re. Europe in the wake of you know who and his OTT comments.
http://tinyurl.com/4jaqk
Long URL edited into TinyURL by the admin. Long URLs break the Forum layout
I guess if you're faced with the thankless task of being UKIP's candidate for Lewisham West, why not just spend your time having a go at other people's policies?
On a more constructive note, I found the following Q&A, which consists of Charles Kennedy answering questions from the public - worth a look if only to give some much needed balance on this site re. Europe in the wake of you know who and his OTT comments.
http://tinyurl.com/4jaqk
Long URL edited into TinyURL by the admin. Long URLs break the Forum layout
-
Alex Feakes
- Posts: 27
- Joined: 3 Apr 2005 15:59
- Location: Forest Hill
Many thanks for your questions, Newman. I hope I can provide satisfactory answers for you and reassure you that it is ‘safe’ to vote Lib Dem 
.
To take them in order:
I can certainly say here in Lewisham West that voting Liberal Democrat won’t give rise to a Tory MP. The Tories have been declining in this constituency in terms of votes and activity since 1992, and the Lib Dems have been on the rise. There’s no evidence that this about to change soon (and in the most recent occasion when voters in the constituency cast ballots, the Forest Hill by-election, the Lib Dems won whilst the Tories share of the vote fell even further and had very few campaigners out and about).
If you like internet election sites, and though I have doubts about the methodology, you may like to check out www.strategicvoter.org.uk, which has the Lib Dems neck and neck with the Tories in this constituency.
Crime:
The common accusation that the Lib Dems are ‘soft on crime’ is just a lazy slogan, if you don’t mind my saying, which doesn’t really engage with any particular policies we’re putting forward. The truth is that the Lib Dems are presenting a more nuanced approach to crime and justice than the Tories, though I’ll leave it to them to discuss their policies on their own thread.
To take crime in general, the Lib Dems believe that the objectives of our criminal justice system are to punish offenders, act as a deterrent to potential offenders, rehabilitate offenders to reduce their chance of reoffending and provide justice for victims.
There will always be debate about which of these should have the greatest priority, but with reoffending rates in excess of 60%, we’ve given greater attention recently to schemes aiming to reduce them, through, for example, increasing education and skills training within prisons (over half of current prisoners are functionally illiterate). We’re also proposing making non-violent criminals enter restorative justice programs through community work – local people would have an input into this.
To take the specific issue raised in some Tory newspaper adverts, in contrast to politicians imposing a blanket life sentence for murder approach, we’re recognising that judges are best placed to take account of the individual circumstances of a case and decide sentencing on them. For example, a victim of domestic violence who murders their assailant should perhaps be due some leniency in sentencing compared to the perpetrator of a ‘gang-land’ killing.
Taxes:
It’s worth noting on this point that all parties are proposing raising the proportion of the nation’s income taken in tax over the next parliament – the differences lie in how much. The Lib Dems’ manifesto includes a number of spending commitments, almost all of which are met from reducing spending elsewhere (for example, spending the £3bn cost of the government’s ID card scheme on 10,000 extra police officers and 20,000 community support officers instead).
There is only one additional tax in our plans: the introduction of a new 50% rate on all earned income above £100,000 per annum, which would pay for our plans to scrap university tuition fees; keeping local taxes down as we axe Council Tax and replace it with a fairer local income tax; and introducing free personal care for the elderly.
Immigration:
The UK benefits hugely from the skills and culture of its immigrant communities, of whatever origin, and artificial and political limits on immigration would damage the economy. We’re proposing that an independent assessment of need for migrant workers be made each quarter or year within each industry sector, and this be used for a ‘green card' system for economic migrants. Exit controls would be re-introduced so that immigration services are aware when someone has overstayed.
There would be no limit on asylum, as not only would this be unfair, it is absurd to suggest that you can predict what international events may occur which give rise to people fleeing persecution. However, the way the current system is run is a mess and far too susceptible to political whims – we propose to establish an independent agency to assess claims and repatriate unsuccessful claimants speedily and fairly (an international model could be the Canadian system which has an appeal rate of just 1%).
An irony in all of this is that it is often the direct or indirect actions of the UK’s foreign policy that creates the situations that cause people to seek asylum: the greatest increase in asylum applications in recent years has been from Afghanistan and Iraq.
Europe:
The Lib Dems basic approach to Europe is that there are many issues that are best dealt with at this level (as there are many that are best dealt with at a local level), and solving these issues requires trust and co-operation on an ongoing basis. We feel that the is a great deal to be gained for the UK from working with our EU partners, from trade and developmental aid through to foreign affairs and the environment, but that there are structural and political problems that get in the way.
More specifically, the problems with the EU institutions we have are that they’re not transparent, too many decisions are made behind closed doors and that the powers of the various bodies are not well defined. This is why, while we’re generally positive about Europe, we’ve always tried to be constructively critical and have campaigned for greater transparency and separation of powers in the EU’s institutions.
Key to this is to increase the say of the citizens of Europe in the decision making process – this means increasing the powers of the directly elected European Parliament over the unelected Commission, bringing transparency to the workings of the Council of Ministers and reducing the overall influence of the Commission. All these proposals are contained within the proposed Constitution document, which would, for the first time, set the limits of the European Union’s powers and would not ‘give away power to Europe’. In contrast, the constitution is actually an excellent opportunity to do exactly the opposite!
.To take them in order:
I can certainly say here in Lewisham West that voting Liberal Democrat won’t give rise to a Tory MP. The Tories have been declining in this constituency in terms of votes and activity since 1992, and the Lib Dems have been on the rise. There’s no evidence that this about to change soon (and in the most recent occasion when voters in the constituency cast ballots, the Forest Hill by-election, the Lib Dems won whilst the Tories share of the vote fell even further and had very few campaigners out and about).
If you like internet election sites, and though I have doubts about the methodology, you may like to check out www.strategicvoter.org.uk, which has the Lib Dems neck and neck with the Tories in this constituency.
Crime:
The common accusation that the Lib Dems are ‘soft on crime’ is just a lazy slogan, if you don’t mind my saying, which doesn’t really engage with any particular policies we’re putting forward. The truth is that the Lib Dems are presenting a more nuanced approach to crime and justice than the Tories, though I’ll leave it to them to discuss their policies on their own thread.
To take crime in general, the Lib Dems believe that the objectives of our criminal justice system are to punish offenders, act as a deterrent to potential offenders, rehabilitate offenders to reduce their chance of reoffending and provide justice for victims.
There will always be debate about which of these should have the greatest priority, but with reoffending rates in excess of 60%, we’ve given greater attention recently to schemes aiming to reduce them, through, for example, increasing education and skills training within prisons (over half of current prisoners are functionally illiterate). We’re also proposing making non-violent criminals enter restorative justice programs through community work – local people would have an input into this.
To take the specific issue raised in some Tory newspaper adverts, in contrast to politicians imposing a blanket life sentence for murder approach, we’re recognising that judges are best placed to take account of the individual circumstances of a case and decide sentencing on them. For example, a victim of domestic violence who murders their assailant should perhaps be due some leniency in sentencing compared to the perpetrator of a ‘gang-land’ killing.
Taxes:
It’s worth noting on this point that all parties are proposing raising the proportion of the nation’s income taken in tax over the next parliament – the differences lie in how much. The Lib Dems’ manifesto includes a number of spending commitments, almost all of which are met from reducing spending elsewhere (for example, spending the £3bn cost of the government’s ID card scheme on 10,000 extra police officers and 20,000 community support officers instead).
There is only one additional tax in our plans: the introduction of a new 50% rate on all earned income above £100,000 per annum, which would pay for our plans to scrap university tuition fees; keeping local taxes down as we axe Council Tax and replace it with a fairer local income tax; and introducing free personal care for the elderly.
Immigration:
The UK benefits hugely from the skills and culture of its immigrant communities, of whatever origin, and artificial and political limits on immigration would damage the economy. We’re proposing that an independent assessment of need for migrant workers be made each quarter or year within each industry sector, and this be used for a ‘green card' system for economic migrants. Exit controls would be re-introduced so that immigration services are aware when someone has overstayed.
There would be no limit on asylum, as not only would this be unfair, it is absurd to suggest that you can predict what international events may occur which give rise to people fleeing persecution. However, the way the current system is run is a mess and far too susceptible to political whims – we propose to establish an independent agency to assess claims and repatriate unsuccessful claimants speedily and fairly (an international model could be the Canadian system which has an appeal rate of just 1%).
An irony in all of this is that it is often the direct or indirect actions of the UK’s foreign policy that creates the situations that cause people to seek asylum: the greatest increase in asylum applications in recent years has been from Afghanistan and Iraq.
Europe:
The Lib Dems basic approach to Europe is that there are many issues that are best dealt with at this level (as there are many that are best dealt with at a local level), and solving these issues requires trust and co-operation on an ongoing basis. We feel that the is a great deal to be gained for the UK from working with our EU partners, from trade and developmental aid through to foreign affairs and the environment, but that there are structural and political problems that get in the way.
More specifically, the problems with the EU institutions we have are that they’re not transparent, too many decisions are made behind closed doors and that the powers of the various bodies are not well defined. This is why, while we’re generally positive about Europe, we’ve always tried to be constructively critical and have campaigned for greater transparency and separation of powers in the EU’s institutions.
Key to this is to increase the say of the citizens of Europe in the decision making process – this means increasing the powers of the directly elected European Parliament over the unelected Commission, bringing transparency to the workings of the Council of Ministers and reducing the overall influence of the Commission. All these proposals are contained within the proposed Constitution document, which would, for the first time, set the limits of the European Union’s powers and would not ‘give away power to Europe’. In contrast, the constitution is actually an excellent opportunity to do exactly the opposite!
-
Alex Feakes
- Posts: 27
- Joined: 3 Apr 2005 15:59
- Location: Forest Hill
In brief response to nasaroc (and with thanks to stuart), I've lived in Catford (most of which is within the constituency) for over six years, and have had some involvement in local campaigning, both party political and otherwise. I'll give a potted history here:
On the political side, I was the Lewisham mayoral candidate for the Lib Dems in 2002 and was the local GLA candidate last year, both of which entailed me getting involved in local issues and campaigning - for example, I contributed to the campaign against the Tetra mast opposite Horniman Primary School in Forest Hill. In 2001, I was the parliamentary candidate for next-door Beckenham constituency, which includes a large chunk of Sydenham, and contributed to the Crystal Palace Park campaign meetings.
Outside of politics, I'm governor of a secondary school within the constituency and get engaged in the local community in other ways. I run a film and video production business and prefer to use local crew and locations where I can - I've recently had projects that used crew from Brockley, Forest Hill and Lee and locations in Crystal Palace and Honor Oak. I'm also a member of the ACTS Credit Union in Sydenham.
While it's true that in recent times the Labour Party have dominated Lewisham West, I think that the Lib Dem's recent win in the Forest Hill by-election will herald the start of a slow change in the politics of area and our increasing involvement in the local community.
On the political side, I was the Lewisham mayoral candidate for the Lib Dems in 2002 and was the local GLA candidate last year, both of which entailed me getting involved in local issues and campaigning - for example, I contributed to the campaign against the Tetra mast opposite Horniman Primary School in Forest Hill. In 2001, I was the parliamentary candidate for next-door Beckenham constituency, which includes a large chunk of Sydenham, and contributed to the Crystal Palace Park campaign meetings.
Outside of politics, I'm governor of a secondary school within the constituency and get engaged in the local community in other ways. I run a film and video production business and prefer to use local crew and locations where I can - I've recently had projects that used crew from Brockley, Forest Hill and Lee and locations in Crystal Palace and Honor Oak. I'm also a member of the ACTS Credit Union in Sydenham.
While it's true that in recent times the Labour Party have dominated Lewisham West, I think that the Lib Dem's recent win in the Forest Hill by-election will herald the start of a slow change in the politics of area and our increasing involvement in the local community.
Last edited by Alex Feakes on 7 Apr 2005 10:09, edited 1 time in total.
Or perhaps use a site that actually isnt politically bias towards one part of the current Government - the war in Iraq
I always find the BBC informative and neutrual perhaps you should check out
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ ... efault.stm
or perhaps
http://tinyurl.com/4xkxn
to compare the parties policies side by side. Think this is a fairer link to check out.
Long URL edited into TinyURL by the admin. Long URLs break the Forum layout
I always find the BBC informative and neutrual perhaps you should check out
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ ... efault.stm
or perhaps
http://tinyurl.com/4xkxn
to compare the parties policies side by side. Think this is a fairer link to check out.
Long URL edited into TinyURL by the admin. Long URLs break the Forum layout
We give as good as we get!
We have been sharing our party's views on this site. Our NHS policy is one of the more recent ones. I am not expecting everyone to agree with us. I have answered the critics to things posted, and the essence of politics is debate. That can mean many things to many people. It can also include criticising other parties's policies, and we welcome the same back as well. It is healthy.
Newman, I apologised for uncharacteristic language on an earlier post I made. I challenged you to do so likewise when you accused me of being a borderline racist (can one be almost married or nearly pregnant?). You also made a clumsy effort to link my real name via your inability to take on board that it is actually illegal to incite racism through to saying that my input here is `unBritish'. I will respond to constructive criticism, but you refuse to accept the responsibility of your comments. You certainly have no interest in apologising for your unfortunate statements.
As for the rest of the UKIP manifesto, portions will be posted here overtime.
Newman, I apologised for uncharacteristic language on an earlier post I made. I challenged you to do so likewise when you accused me of being a borderline racist (can one be almost married or nearly pregnant?). You also made a clumsy effort to link my real name via your inability to take on board that it is actually illegal to incite racism through to saying that my input here is `unBritish'. I will respond to constructive criticism, but you refuse to accept the responsibility of your comments. You certainly have no interest in apologising for your unfortunate statements.
As for the rest of the UKIP manifesto, portions will be posted here overtime.
Thats not true. Immigration from other cultures causes a lot of social tension, not just between the British and immigrants, but between immigrants and immigrants. Also, Muslims, for example, get so much special attention and drain resources from other communities. At schools they get to have their luxurious prayer rooms, while the rest are forced out on a concrete playground.Alex Feakes wrote: Immigration:
The UK benefits hugely from the skills and culture of its immigrant communities, of whatever origin, and artificial and political limits on immigration would damage the economy.
There are huge amount of unemployed British people who can't find jobs because of all the positive discrimination means foreigners get their jobs instead. Particularly elder experienced people can't find jobs as the young immigrants take them. Why don't we make university and schools provide skills such as more medecine places rather than drain other countries of their own much needed doctors. Some are milking our generous state by benefits and some even fraud. We paid the taxes - they get the benefit.
That is unfair. Millions are living in horrific conditions throughout the world, and, put simply, we can't fit them all on this little Island. You would only take the ones that get in the press and leave the rest to die. We should be helping people in their own countries, not flooding this country with them.Alex Feakes wrote:There would be no limit on asylum, as not only would this be unfair, it is absurd to suggest that you can predict what international events may occur which give rise to people fleeing persecution.
Why do we need French, Germans, and all the others to make policy for the British? We speak different languages and are a seperate Island. Let's make our own laws rather than be dictated to by the politically correct beaurocratic dictatorship. We have enough forms to fill and enough red tape tieing us up.Alex Feakes wrote:Europe:
The Lib Dems basic approach to Europe is that there are many issues that are best dealt with at this level (as there are many that are best dealt with at a local level), and solving these issues requires trust and co-operation on an ongoing basis.