The National Liberal Party is well known for supporting local shops – and in this case, self-employed workers as well. Whilst supporting your local shops, we’d also urge consumers to Buy British & use cash wherever possible.

FROM DAY ONE, the National Liberal Party has always championed local shops.  We’ve spent years pointing out the advantages of having small – and usually family-run – shops on the doorstop.   

We’ve always acknowledged that times are hard and price considerations are obviously very important.  However, we feel that local shops are more than a convenient place to shop.  They’re actually an essential part of the glue that helps to maintain community spirit – a place to bump into friends, neighbours and relatives.  

The shopkeeper, as a self-employed businessman or woman, also plays a vital role in the local economy.  Indeed, these small shops collectively employ hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the length and breadth of Britain.  As such, they represent an important – but often overlooked – economic bloc.  

In addition to shopping locally, we’d also like to see consumers buying and supporting British products wherever possible.  

Again, the NLP has been running a Buy British campaign for several years now.  Here, we thought that it made perfect sense to protect and enhance our industries.  Our campaign is a positive one & advocates a policy of ‘National Preference’.  Here, the three key elements are self-sufficiency, sovereignty & sustainability.   

We mentioned that our Buy British policy is a positive one.  It’s also one of common sense.  The government’s shambolic response to Covid showed this.  Here we had to import PPE items – some of which weren’t fit for purpose and are presumably being stored awaiting a decision on what to do with them.   

These PPE items could & should’ve been wholly produced here.  That’s what we mean by buying British.  

As well as shopping locally & buying British, we also feel that it’s important that consumers be given a choice as to their method of payment.  

We’ve noticed that some businesses are now insisting on card payments only.  We’ve absolutely no objection if someone wants to live their life using plastic. What we’re saying is that there should be a choice.  

This is because many people simply prefer to deal in cash.   

For some, it’s just the way they’ve been brought up.  For others, it’s a way of managing their personal finances.  After all, when dealing in cash, you can’t spend what you haven’t got!  

There are practical reasons for keeping cash as well.  If the internet went down – or even if there was some form of electrical blackout – nobody would be able to make a card payment.  It would be impossible just to buy a few essential everyday items.  

With all of the above in mind, our message is both clear & simple:  Shop Local, Buy British & Use Cash!

Armada Way in Plymouth, Devon. Earlier this month the local Tory council destroyed much of the urban forest which formed a walkway from the sea to the city centre. Now only about a dozen trees are left standing. Why?

ON THE NIGHT of 14th March, Plymouth City Council in Devon spent five hours destroying an urban forest.   

Despite wide-scale local opposition, the area was cordoned off and both police & security guards were brought in.  The council then felled nearly 120 healthy mature trees.  These trees formed a walkway from the sea to the city centre along Armada Way.   

Thanks to the quick thinking of a local environmental group called STRAW (Save the Trees of Armada Way) a last-minute high court injunction was served which saved around a dozen trees.   

The fate of the remaining trees will be decided sometime in the future.  A judicial review is due to be held sometime in the summer.  

As everyone knows, environmental concerns are high on the political agenda.  So why did the Tory Council in Plymouth commit such an act of environmental destruction?  

According to the council, it is all part of a multi-million pound redevelopment of Armada Way.  Apparently the regeneration plan for the area includes new walk ways & cycle routes.  However, many people are wondering why these couldn’t have gone beside the existing trees?  

Redevelopment work had started some time ago but was halted last November.  This was because over 10,000 people had signed a petition calling for the planned tree-felling to be stopped.  

This led to the council conducting a ‘community engagement’ programme in February.  In early March they announced that they were finalising various reports including the results of the engagement programme.  

Local environmental campaigners from STRAW – https://www.facebook.com/strawplymouth – called the engagement programme an ‘insult’ to the people of Plymouth & claimed that the council was more interested in not missing out on nearly three million pounds worth of funding.  

STRAW also believes that the council has always aimed to destroy the trees: ‘At the start of the design stage no attempt was ever made to keep the trees.  Even designs from 2017, before they had even applied for funding, would have required all the trees to be removed.’  

It will be interesting to see how the judicial review goes later on this year.  Unfortunately, it won’t be able to bring back the destroyed trees – but it might compel the council to replant the 120 trees it felled.  

Even more interesting will be the local council elections in early May.  If public anger is still at a peak it could spell real political trouble for the Tories in Plymouth.

GARY LINEKER has been all over the news recently.  For those who don’t know, Lineker hails from Leicester and began his football career with Leicester City in 1978.  He’s also played for Everton, Barcelona & Spurs.  He ended his playing career in Japan with Nagoya Grampus Eight and retired in 1994.  

He also represented England at international level.  Here, he remains England’s fourth-highest scorer, with 48 goals.  

He’s since carved out a very successful career with the BBC.  He’s probably best known as the presenter of Match of the Day and as lead presenter for live matches & competitions like the World Cup.   

According to this BBC News item – https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-62133808 – Lineker earned an eye watering  £1.35m over the 2021/22 financial year.  He’s undoubtedly done well for himself & we have absolutely no problem with people earning big money.

Lineker has come a long way.  As far as we’re aware, Lineker is from a humble & ordinary working-class background.  He started off life working on the family fruit & veg stall in Leicester Market  

He’s been married & divorced twice & his eldest son (George) survived a rare form of leukaemia when he was a baby.  So, life hasn’t exactly been a bed of roses for him.  

Over the years, Lineker has expressed views that are often described ‘woke’ – although many people disagree on what this term actually means.  We believe that many on the reactionary ‘right’ are simply opposed to him because they are reactionaries.  We also believe that some on the ‘left’ support him because his views wind up those on the ‘right’.  

Sadly, many of the online comments we’ve read about him (both for and against) are simply juvenile.  Very few have attempted to address the fundamental issue of freedom of thought, freedom of speech (& freedom of assembly for all).  Hopefully our potted history has provided some context to his life & what may drive his views.   

So, what did Gary Lineker say that got him in so much hot water?   

Basically, he took to Twitter to oppose the governments Illegal Migration Bill – https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/illegal-migration-bill – which bans migrants who arrive on small boats from settling in the UK.  

Here he noted: “This is just an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people in language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the ’30s, and I’m out of order?”  

This simple tweet led to many on the ‘right’ to condemn Lineker.  Some even demanded that he be sacked as a BBC presenter.  They pointed out that the BBC contract of employment has the following rule:

We’d argue that bringing ‘the BBC into disrepute’ (point 2) is so wide ranging & subjective that it’s next to useless.   

Indeed, how would one define ‘disrepute’ these days?  How many people have to disagree with your point of view before the company you work for is brought into ‘disrepute’?    

Some people like Gary Lineker hold – and express – strong views.  This in itself means that someone, or some group, are inevitably going to object to what he says.  Let’s face it, mankind has been arguing about politics (in particular) forever and a day.  Social media only amplifies this & Twitter can be a bit of a cesspit, to say the very least.   

It’s also important to point out that Lineker is a BBC sports presenter & is not a newscaster.  Therefore, we’d have thought that the third point (above) doesn’t really apply to him.  Even if it did, we’d run into the same subjective problems relating to what subjects are ‘controversial’.   

National Liberals believe that both ‘left’ and ‘right’ are engaged in a dangerous form of tit for tat cancel culture.   

Here the ‘left’ object to something that’s been said by someone from the ‘right’ (or who is perceived to be from the ‘right’).  The ‘left’ create an online storm hoping that their target will self-censor themselves or will be disciplined – or even sacked – by their employers.   

We only have to look at the treatment meted out to JK Rowling & Matthew Le Tissier who’ve been accused of expressing ‘dangerous’ views (JK Rowling in respect of her views relating to the Trans debate & Matthew Le Tissier in respect of his views relating to the Covid lockdowns and the possible relationship between onfield collapses & Covid vaccinations after three footballers collapsed in one week).  

To counter this, the ‘right’ then employ the same tactics & create a storm over the views of someone from the ‘left’ as Gary Lineker has found out.

It should come as no surprise that the ‘left’ effectively act as a mirror image of the ‘right’.  They pay lip service to the twin ideals of civil & religious liberties for all and free thought, free speech & free assembly for all.  In fact, they’re all dangerous posturing fools who wouldn’t understand the concept of a principled stand.  

In contrast, we prefer open, honest & respectful debate.  No subject matter should be taboo.  Our view is that either we all have rights – or none of us have rights.  And those rights should be extended to everyone, no matter what their point of view is.  

•  IT’S OFTEN SAID that whilst the media is fixated on one subject, one has to look around for the news item that they’re not telling you about!  As we all know, Gary Lineker has dominated the headlines for the last couple of weeks.  So what’s been going on in the background – any thoughts?

The National Liberal Party’s idea of localism is the complete opposite of the Government’s proposed 15 minute cities.

FIRST OF ALL, the National Liberal Party wishes to nail its colour’s firmly to the mast.  We are a movement that supports localism.   

But what is localism?   

As our poster notes, we define it as ‘a policy which supports the local production, distribution and consumption of goods and services.  It puts the local economy, community and environment first.’  

However, our idea of localism should not be confused with the government’s idea of 15 minute cities.  

The National Liberal Party is completely opposed to ‘big government.’  Instead, we favour ‘small government’.  We wish to restrict government functions to the absolute minimum.   

Government shouldn’t interfere in the day-to-day affairs of ordinary people.  We’ve absolutely no interest in extending the power & reach of what’s become known as the ‘Nanny States’.  

As we constantly note, our raison d’êtreis is economic, political & national self-determination.  

We firmly believe that our people (and nations) should be sovereign – and not subjects.  Therefore, we propose devolving all forms of power down to the lowest possible common denominator.   

Localism is the opposite of globalism.  

Localism is more to do with voluntary association & mutual aid.  Globalism is all about coercive control.  And that is why we localists oppose the globalists.  

Globalists – the banks, corporations & MSM – are only interested in money, power & control.  Effectively, they’re the new slave masters.  

With the above in mind, two things should be blindingly obvious:  

•  National Liberalism is all about freedom – and not control.  

•  And the National Liberal Party’s idea of localism is the complete opposite of the Government’s proposed 15 minute cities.