Fares4Forces & The English Democrats

#1
The English Democrats have asked arrse for their kind permission to discuss issues relating to military service and issues regarding military families and eduction. The English Democrats are currently and officially the fastest growing political party in the United Kingdom, we are campaigning for an English Parliament and an end to the Barnett formula. We are proud to announce that we have many former servicemen amongst our ranks from England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We proudly represent those people living in England regardless of where you come from, it is about getting the best for those who live in England regardless of race or religion. We are currently the only political party to publicly support Action for Armed Forces who's members exceed 12,000 members, 7,000 of which are serving soldier, sailors and airmen/women.

We are also responsible for implementing the Fares4Forces scheme whereby all dependents of military personnel will benefit from FREE local bus travel where ever they live!. There are far more in depth defense policies however we would like the chance to communicate with the troops directly for you to tell us as a political party how best we can serve you.

“ The United Kingdoms Armed Forces, Veterans and military families are a very important and valued constituency in their own right. The English Democrats fully support our UKAF, Veteran’s and military families in all aspects of military life, from deployment, education, welfare and family life. The English Democrats will continue to further strengthen outreach to our troops and military families who have given so much in the defense of our country. We have and will continue to create opportunity for public awareness and educating the public on the English Democrats principle’s regarding our military forces, veterans and their families. The English Democrats promote principles, which include professional training packages designed to afford realistic training with suitable equipment designed for ensuring the modern day soldier is capable of completing tasks to his/her best ability. The English Democrats also identify that the families of service personnel are the backbone of our forces, and they must be treated as such in order for the service personnel to operate at 100% effectiveness. We are committed to ensuring that all family matters are addressed as a priority. The English Democrats are actively promoting the Fares4Forces scheme whereby military families and dependents would be entitled to travel free using the local bus service. Also we are the only political party who fully support Action for Armed Forces, an organization which currently acts as a voice for and on behalf of the Armed Forces. Action for Armed Forces currently has over 12,000 members 7,000 of which are serving personnel. Action for Armed Forces work closely with Talking2minds eradicating PTSD. Our principles include proper training and equipment for our troops as they head to battle or a peace keeping role; a budget that reflects the United Kingdoms responsibilities to our veterans by providing first class health care options as a priority and assistance to military families; support and assistance for veterans and their families when they return home from fighting abroad; and a continued support for the values and dignity that come with a military career with the United Kingdoms Armed Forces.

We are here to challenge the very issues which concern you and your families on a daily basis, please join us and help where you can.
 
#2
English_Democrats said:
We are also responsible for implementing the Fares4Forces scheme whereby all dependents of military personnel will benefit from FREE local bus travel where ever they live!.
.
That'll be interesting to see.

I wonder what DeutscheBahn and the like will have to say about that or are you going to be refunding the costs?
 
#3
Fair sir, what is a position of your party toward Afghanistan?
 
#4
You mispelled education.
 
#5
English_Democrats said:
The English Democrats are currently and officially the fastest growing political party in the United Kingdom.
So you have one member now you have ten, that's fast growing but insignificant.

This just a "Vote for me, I'll throw money at you" statement from a useless party that haven't a hope.
 
#6
Ooops I nearly forgot & you nearly got me, but it is APRIL FOOLS DAY! :lol: :lol:
 
#7
English_Democrats said:
We are also responsible for implementing the Fares4Forces scheme whereby all dependents of military personnel will benefit from FREE local bus travel where ever they live!.
Why? Granted, it's fashionable to give soldiers free stuff at the moment, but I don't see any pressing reason why bus travel of all things should be free not only to soldiers but to their dependents as well (and would a soldier's partner with their own income count as a "dependent" and be eligible for travel?). I would think that investment in medical care specific to the forces would be more relevant in these times of budget restrictions. Just my tuppence :)

You're the English Democrats; what is your view on the Union with Scotland and Northern Ireland and on devolution?

What do you propose to do about the economy?
 
#8
Errm, The ED map on the ED's website was drawn in 1971. Stop been a bunch of prats and update it. What's the ED's development strategy on urban transport outside Greater London?
 
#9
The English Democrats believe that the work which has been carried out by our Armed Forces in Afghanistan has been instrumental in re-building the country, This said we feel that our troops commitment to front line duties is far greater than any other nation other than the US. We feel that the role of the British Armed Forces is so in depth that all other nations have become dependable on our commitment and with this in mind we feel the British Army should only be committing the level of troops as all other nations.

Our official stance is as follows:

The English Democrats supports continued membership of NATO as a strictly defensive alliance
which does not interfere in the internal affairs of its member states.
Our armed forces should enjoy the highest standards of training and equipment. Their primary role should
be as a fighting force. The resources devoted to them should match the commitments they are expected
to fullfil. The main purpose of our armed forces should be to protect our country and the interests of its
people. We are opposed to the use of our forces in operations where they are in effect serving as
mercenaries of a foreign state
 
#10
What are your policies on geting rid of unwelcome and criminal immigrants from England such as Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling?
 
#11
ex_colonial said:
Ooops I nearly forgot & you nearly got me, but it is APRIL FOOLS DAY! :lol: :lol:
Agree'd :roll:

I'm just waiting for a BNP/UKIP coalition seeing what day it is!
 
#12
The English Democrats believe that the work which has been carried out by our Armed Forces in Afghanistan has been instrumental in re-building the country, This said we feel that our troops commitment to front line duties is far greater than any other nation other than the US. We feel that the role of the British Armed Forces is so in depth that all other nations have become dependable on our commitment and with this in mind we feel the British Army should only be committing the level of troops as all other nations.

Our official stance is as follows:

The English Democrats supports continued membership of NATO as a strictly defensive alliance
which does not interfere in the internal affairs of its member states.
Our armed forces should enjoy the highest standards of training and equipment. Their primary role should
be as a fighting force. The resources devoted to them should match the commitments they are expected
to fullfil. The main purpose of our armed forces should be to protect our country and the interests of its
people. We are opposed to the use of our forces in operations where they are in effect serving as
mercenaries of a foreign state
That's all well and good. But What's the ED's development strategy on urban transport outside Greater London? You aren't buying my vote by the way. You might want to win it.
 
#13
InVinoVeritas said:
What are your policies on geting rid of unwelcome and criminal immigrants from England such as Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling?
We support a points system for entry to the UK which is based on the Canadian and Australian model.
Points should be awarded for, among other things: educational and professional qualification; family
links with England; financial resources; the ability to speak English. In other words, entry should be determined
by our needs as a society and the ability of newcomers to be absorbed into the prevailing public
culture. High priority should be given to creating a peaceful society which is bound together by shared
values and perceptions. The wishes, security and interests of the people of England should be the
dominant factors in determining asylum and immigration policies for England.
Should there be an economic need for immigration it should be met by the employment of people on fixed
term work permits. Our aim should be to meet the need for skilled workers from within.A points system
should be used to bring an end to mass immigration and only allow that immigration which is in the
national interest. A points system should not be used to facilitate and legitimize a continuation of mass
immigration.
Immigrants should not be a burden on the taxpayer and should be economically self-sustaining. This requires
that the wages paid to immigrants should be at a level necessary for those immigrants to pay sufficient
tax revenues to meet expected welfare and other public sector costs – or else that their employers
make payment for the shortfall. Furthermore, immigrants and/or their employers, should make payment
a capital sum to reflect a full contribution to the existing capital wealth of the nation, such as schools, hospitals,
roads, housing etc. Those potential immigrants who are unable or unwilling to make these payments
will not be allowed into the country.
International law is not fixed for all time. We should not feel bound by rules that were devised several
decades ago when circumstances were very different. Asylum seekers should seek asylum in a state adjoining
or nearby the state from which they are fleeing. None of the UK's immediate neighbors are terrorizing regimes. The UK should refuse to accept any further asylum seekers and should instead give
financial assistance to genuine refugees in their own or neighboring countries, where such financial assistance
will have the greatest beneficial impact. In order to end the mass inflow of asylum seekers into
the UK, the UK must withdraw from the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees.
 
#14
English_Democrats said:
Our official stance is as follows:

The English Democrats supports continued membership of NATO as a strictly defensive alliance
which does not interfere in the internal affairs of its member states.
So no change there.

Our armed forces should enjoy the highest standards of training and equipment. Their primary role should be as a fighting force. The resources devoted to them should match the commitments they are expected to fullfil.
So if you take away the commitment you take away the resources.

The main purpose of our armed forces should be to protect our country and the interests of its people. We are opposed to the use of our forces in operations where they are in effect serving as mercenaries of a foreign state
So you will take away the commitment.
What you are saying is you will take away the funding and reduce the armed forces to a domestic protection force and that's supposed to get us to vote for you.
 
#15
English_Democrats said:
Action for Armed Forces work closely with Talking2minds eradicating PTSD
"Eradicating" eh? Are you sure you mean to use that word, and not "treating"? So long as we have war and people are still human, PTSD will occur. Unless you plan to eradicate either of those?

However, if you mean to develop a race of Terminator-style robots to fight on our behalf and/or take over the world, then I might vote for that.
 
#16
Under the Scotland Act 1998, Chapter 46, Schedule 5, there are certain powers that are reserved for the UK Parliament. What powers would be enforced under an English Parliament only for England: What powers would be resreved for the UK Parliament?
 
#17
English_Democrats said:
InVinoVeritas said:
What are your policies on geting rid of unwelcome and criminal immigrants from England such as Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling?
We support a points system for entry to the UK which is based on the Canadian and Australian model.
Points should be awarded for, among other things: educational and professional qualification; family
links with England; financial resources; the ability to speak English. In other words, entry should be determined
by our needs as a society and the ability of newcomers to be absorbed into the prevailing public
culture. High priority should be given to creating a peaceful society which is bound together by shared
values and perceptions. The wishes, security and interests of the people of England should be the
dominant factors in determining asylum and immigration policies for England.
Should there be an economic need for immigration it should be met by the employment of people on fixed
term work permits. Our aim should be to meet the need for skilled workers from within.A points system
should be used to bring an end to mass immigration and only allow that immigration which is in the
national interest. A points system should not be used to facilitate and legitimize a continuation of mass
immigration.
Immigrants should not be a burden on the taxpayer and should be economically self-sustaining. This requires
that the wages paid to immigrants should be at a level necessary for those immigrants to pay sufficient
tax revenues to meet expected welfare and other public sector costs – or else that their employers
make payment for the shortfall. Furthermore, immigrants and/or their employers, should make payment
a capital sum to reflect a full contribution to the existing capital wealth of the nation, such as schools, hospitals,
roads, housing etc. Those potential immigrants who are unable or unwilling to make these payments
will not be allowed into the country.
International law is not fixed for all time. We should not feel bound by rules that were devised several
decades ago when circumstances were very different. Asylum seekers should seek asylum in a state adjoining
or nearby the state from which they are fleeing. None of the UK's immediate neighbors are terrorizing regimes. The UK should refuse to accept any further asylum seekers and should instead give
financial assistance to genuine refugees in their own or neighboring countries, where such financial assistance
will have the greatest beneficial impact. In order to end the mass inflow of asylum seekers into
the UK, the UK must withdraw from the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees.
Good enough for me..may I suggest the formation of a paramilitary border force recruited from ex soldiers to enforce the policy?
 
#19
Oh, good. An April Fools' wah. Just the ticket to tackle the boredom...

English_Democrats said:
We support a points system for entry to the UK which is based on the Canadian and Australian model.
So you support the model that New Labour just introduced? Based, as it was, heavily on the Australian model?

English_Democrats said:
Points should be awarded for, among other things: educational and professional qualification; family links with England; financial resources; the ability to speak English.
So your only change from the current NL-conceived model is that there should be some family link with England? Don’t the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish you claim to represent get a look in?

English_Democrats said:
High priority should be given to creating a peaceful society which is bound together by shared values and perceptions.
Where have I heard that sort of thing before? Oh, yes. I remember.

English_Democrats said:
The wishes, security and interests of the people of England should be the dominant factors in determining asylum and immigration policies for England.
I thought we were setting immigration policy for the UK?

English_Democrats said:
Should there be an economic need for immigration it should be met by the employment of people on fixed term work permits.
Should there be a need for immigration, we’ll need to ensure that the terms address the needs of the immigrants – harsh reality of life rapidly approaching, but we’re not the be all and end all.

What duration of fixed term were you thinking of and will it suffice to attract the best and brightest immigrants in the face of more open-ended offers from our competitors?

English_Democrats said:
Immigrants should not be a burden on the taxpayer and should be economically self-sustaining. This requires that the wages paid to immigrants should be at a level necessary for those immigrants to pay sufficient tax revenues to meet expected welfare and other public sector costs – or else that their employers make payment for the shortfall. Furthermore, immigrants and/or their employers, should make payment a capital sum to reflect a full contribution to the existing capital wealth of the nation, such as schools, hospitals, roads, housing etc. Those potential immigrants who are unable or unwilling to make these payments will not be allowed into the country.
So in other words, you intend to dictate who an employer can and can’t hire. Sounds like good old fashioned authoritarianism wrapped in the flag, to me.

There also seems to be the usual conflation of 'immigrant' and other categories. Immigrants who are in lawful UK employment are paid at the UK rate and pay the appropriate levels of tax and NI already. There are a variety of scams employers can use to circumvent immigration law, such as labelling them ‘overseas contractors’, etc., which won’t be touched by your plans at all.

English_Democrats said:
International law is not fixed for all time. We should not feel bound by rules that were devised several decades ago when circumstances were very different.
The laws on assault and theft were drafted many years ago, but I still must perforce restrain myself from stamping on the heads of idiots who spout drivel. Rules are rules and if they aren’t appropriate then they need to be changed, not ignored. We are either bound by them until such time as they are changed or we’re anarchists.

Ah.... home time.
 
#20
Whilst we value all of the comments, all of which will be answered of course we have permission to discuss what improvements can be made for you the serving soldier, we will answer your questions but please remember that some of the questions asked here are for committees and not manifesto commitments which is the same for all parties. These answers will be put to the party and evaluated.
 

Similar threads