"Union man's sleaze attack derails PM's fightback: Tony Blair had planned to relaunch his premiership this week with a new agenda and reshuffle. Then Jack Dromey intervened. . ." by Patrick Wintour, political editor, The Guardian, Saturday March 18, 2006http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,1733727,00.html"There's no new push for Blair to go - not even from Brown: Labour is ahead in the polls, and the country is prospering. It is nothing like Thatcher's last." by Martin Kettle, The Guardian, Saturday March 18, 2006. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,1733672,00.html---------- Forwarded Message ----------Subject: Labour Loans Scandal: "Say It Isn't So" Continues To Be Sought UnsuccessfullyDate: Saturday 18 March 2006 08:28From: Gary D ChanceTo: news24@bbc.co.uk, breakfasttv@bbc.co.ukYour newspaper comments this morning while reading the Guardian are disturbingly accurate. I'm referring to the fact that this loans scandal still finds Tony Blair not being met with demands to go and polls still favour Labour as you have noted.The reason is perhaps that this scandal is so stunning that it has everyone speechless waiting for the full facts to come out. It could be that everyone knows this is devastating and the end for Tony Blair so nothing needs to be said. The facts so far speak for themselves. Do the polls incorporate the most recent revelations?Almost 50 years ago headlines in the US rang out with "Say it isn't so Joe" about Joe Namath's 1/3rd ownership in Bachelors III on Lexington Avenue in New York. This bar/restaurant attracted gangsters who came to check on his health each week during football season for their illegal gambling activities. This became the subject of a Time magazine cover story when Joe Namath said he would retire from football rather than give up his right to part ownership in a Manhattan bar/restaurant. If you don't know who Joe Namath is, don't worry. It's not important. If you do, you will appreciate the implications of the gangster analogy. In the end Joe Namath gave up his interest in Bachelors III and continued playing football. Sports betting is not legal in the US like it is in the UK.It is all the more incredible that John Prescott and Gordon Brown are denying knowledge of the loans now. Not only are they distancing themselves from Tony Blair, but it begs the incredible questions about this separate set of books, who did the accounting (and how) and where did the money go?I personally know just how bad this Labour Government is as a result of surveillance torture carried out against me 24/7 for the past seven years and seven months since August 1998. I also know that this involves several departments of Government and scores if not hundreds of people. There has been a consistent effort across the board and from the ground to the very top to deny what has been happening while blaming me, the victim, in a classic abuse cover up.Who actually is running the Labour Party's finances if it is not its Treasurer with the involvement by the Deputy Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer?Is this the reason why they wanted to squeeze Gordon Brown out of his traditional role of being in charge of the election campaign?Are we to believe that these people did not know, or are they denying knowledge when they did, in fact, know? And, didn't they have a responsibility to know and how could the financial information be kept from them?Surely the expenditure of this vast amount of money had to be accounted for and cash flow sourced from somewhere by someone? It is quite difficult to believe that these people were ignorant of this huge sum of money."So it isn't so Joe" rang out from the press almost 50 years ago demanding that Joe Namath deny any affiliation with organised crime. Today in contrast, everyone if falling all over themselves pleading ignorance: Tessa Jowell, Harriet Harmon's husband, John Prescott, Gordon Brown . . . who's next? Tony Blair has taken full responsibility for this. Wow!Tessa Jowell's husband has been associated for years with organised crime members and now faces the possibility of a trial in Italy based upon allegations that he accepted a bribe from the Italian Prime Minister to provide false testimony in court. Sleaze in this Government is apparently just beginning to surface and needs a thorough public inquiry now to determine who knows what and when it was all known while finding out where all this money went and who did the bookkeeping. The questions go and on.I submit that this Labour Government could easily have been engaged in a massive dirty tricks campaign to get re-elected which involved spying of the kind to which I've been subjected all these years 24/7. That costs a bundle and could be financed in a small separate organisation which would have bypassed all the known and proper structures of the Labour Party.It's time for the media to really start digging and stop denying reality. Could it be that the absence of an uproar about Tony Blair means that the truth is known amongst the media and too horrible to publicly recognise?"Pension plan 'must be affordable': meetings are taking place in six cities. Any changes to the UK pension system must be affordable to the government, Work and Pensions Secretary John Hutton has said."http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4814608.stm---------- Forwarded Message ----------Subject: Pension Advice on Pension DayDate: Saturday 18 March 2006 09:05From: Gary D ChanceTo: breakfasttv@bbc.co.uk, news24@bbc.co.uk, haveyoursay@bbc.co.ukIf you think the Labour Party's loan financing is manipulative, you should take a very close look at private pension funding decisions.No one can give them advice because corporate managements make decisions in their own interest and seek every means to come up with what they want to do rather then accomplish what they should and need to do.Those who try to advise private corporations on how to manage their pension schemes and assets find themselves trying to figure out what corporate management wants and then giving them the means to carry this out legally.This is why there exists a pensions catastrophe. There is only one solution: pension savings must be placed in the hands of every single individual with the structure and means made available for everyone to do this.People act in their own self interest.Corporate management act in their interest with respect to corporate management. They do not act in the interest of the pension beneficiaries. Those pension fund assets are corporate footballs with which senior management play. I know this from direct experience. I got sacked for fighting for good pension fund management and its administration. Those in Government do the same thing.The only way to meet the pension needs of the nation is to set up a completely new system where the individual controls the pension funding decisions throughout his/her working life, is fully vested and has those assets invested independently under the individual's control from both personal and corporate contributions.It is not possible to promise benefits in the future which are not paid for in the present including the working life investment returns for the individual. The pension system is a giant Ponzi scheme which was destined to come apart at some time. Until this is changed, nothing will work.Oh, yes, and don't forget that this revision will eliminate the City parasites who feed off institutional funds bleeding them for their own self interest too. There's a lot of work to be done, but nothing will be accomplished until honesty and objectivity prevail.---------- Forwarded Message ----------Subject: With People Like Pickering No Wonder There's a Pension CatastropheDate: Saturday 18 March 2006 10:04From: Gary D ChanceTo: news24@bbc.co.ukHe really represents the muddle along approach which does not focus on individual responsibility and savings from the beginning of working life to its end by means of financial investment facilities which will allow tax free savings fully vested in the hands of the employees established with independent investment alternatives.This will occur at some point, but it appears that all the mistakes possible will be made first before an impoverished nation realises that there is only one way to set up policy for pension savings: individual responsibility. The transition to this needs to start now because it will take a working life of some 60 years or more from now before it is fully established. In the meantime, the old system must be unwound so that the change does not destroy. This means that the Government must be responsible for its misdeeds just as corporations must be responsible too.Making the individual suffer is not the way, but this is what is happening.---------- Forwarded Message ----------Subject: This Government Seeks Dependency By All On ItDate: Saturday 18 March 2006 10:38From: Gary D ChanceTo: news24@bbc.co.ukThis Government does not want to create individual independence with people who have the ability to function fully, lead independent lives and redress legitimate grievances.If you look at everything this Government has done and is doing, you will see the "Nanny" state at work with complete control and domination being developed consistent with creating dependency of all upon it.This results in the inversion of society where people opt for power over expertise and competence. Decisions and policy are determined by the standard of control, domination and dependence. Policy has not and is not being determined based upon objectivity and expertise.Being told what to do and subject to adversity for those who fail to comply has been the essence of this Government coming directly from Tony Blair right from the start in 1997.The list goes on and covers all that has been done by this Government sugar coated by words intended to placate opposition. However, there is a never ending push toward domination, control and dependency.