Category Archives: General

Britain – A New Future Outside The EU

For years we have all been led to believe that being in the EU allowed Britain to have a say, have influence at the top table.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality the majority of the ‘standards’ imposed by the EU are not set in Brussels but by international trade and technical organisations.
The EU merely took those standards, gold plated them with whatever political impositions they wished to enforce, and sent them out as Directives to the member States.

To have a real say, to have real influence, Britain can now rejoin these International bodies and have a seat at the real top tables around the globe.

Let us take the Automotive Industry for example. Standards are set by WP.29, part of UNECE.
The EU took these standards and simply superimposed new rules over and above, such as the impending EU satelite tracking system.

Or the infamous EU reduces roaming charges for mobile phones. The EU did not set this standard, this was set by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), passed to the regional standards organisation the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) and then given to the EU to implement.

It really makes one wonder what all that money sent to Brussels every day was for, beyond buying champagne and caviar, or paying inflated wages and pensions for a political elite that served no real purpose.

With Britain free of the EU we can again take our place at the top tables in the global community, to rejoin the international and regional bodies that shape our world, free of the political baggage that has been imposed on us for the last 40 years.

We will reclaim our seats on the International Organization for Standardization , the International Electrotechnical Commission , and the International Telecommunication Union , which have each existed for more than 50 years (founded in 1947, 1906, and 1865, respectively) and are all based in Geneva, Switzerland, thus restoring little Britain with its global reach.

At the regional level we can rejoin the European Committee for Standardization (CEN), the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC), the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), and the Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM), none of which are influenced or run by the EU.

Beyond that there are hundreds of international and regional standards bodies that cover virtually everything from making matchsticks, mobile phones, travel to nuclear power plants, all of which a new revitalised Britain could have a say in shaping. We can again be international rule makers, not simply rule takers.

So no more talk of bent bananas, under-performing vacuum cleaners or kettles that will not boil. Let free speech, free trade and freedom of choice once again become the norm in the Britain of tomorrow.

To make this happen the mind-set of Britain needs to change. Conservatives need to become conservative again, the negative, divisive and belittling attitude of the socialists and bansturbators need to be contained, and the voice of freedom needs to ring true with libertarian influence in the corridors of power.

We gave up our voice on the world stage to the EU, but now having decided to leave we will not be isolated, we will be dynamic, alive again, free to trade and set standards around the globe.

This is the awakening of a free trading nation, one which the Libertarian Party UK will be looking forward to participating in.

Join Us today, and help us to become part of the future, not the past.

REFERENDUM 2016

The referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU will soon be upon us and LPUK have always fully supported the Vote Leave campaign and strongly believe that decisions should be taken as locally to those that they affect as possible.

However the main thing that I have taken from these campaigns is how much the political classes have lost the trust of the public. The majority of conversations that I have had have revolved around the statement “I just don’t know what the truth is.”

With project fear in full effect the Remain camp have consistently bombarded the public (Often with tax payer funding) with warnings of Armageddon were we to leave the union.

These tactics are not just damaging to the EU campaigns but to the future of politics in the UK.

For my own personal experiences whenever I have told people I am supporting the Leave campaign I am often rounded on with accusations of “Little Englander”, “Xenophobe” and “Racist”. The irony is that I am actually voting to leave for the exact opposite reason.

I believe that it is the EU that is parochial (Trade should only happen between it’s members.) Xenophobic (Goods from outside the EU are lesser than those inside made inside the EU) and Racist (An unskilled European Migrant should have priority after a highly skilled African migrant).

I believe in the Free Market and I believe that immigration is a source of great good into a modern society – As long as the welfare state exists I believe it needs to be controlled, but to me that is a welfare issue rather than an immigration issue – but in all these areas the EU prevents freedoms rather than promoting them.

So on June the 23rd I urge everyone to ignore the fear tactics, ignore the critics and simply ask yourself. “Do you want to be a part of this club?”

Adam Brown
Party Leader

Adam Brown is Elected New Party Leader for Libertarians UK

Following an internal ballot on 15th August 2015, Libertarians across the country have unanimously elected Adam Brown as their new party leader. A clear and enthusiastic vote of trust by jubilant activists and committed friends of LPUK to the type of inclusive policies defended throughout his campaign.

 

Hailing from Crawley in West Sussex, Adam has impressed party members with the fact he previously served on Crawley Borough Council as Chair of the Licensing Committee, as well as offering Portfolio Support for the Leader of the council. Interestingly, Adam also chaired the “value for money” scrutiny panel in its endeavours to ensure the council could justify everything it was spending. All adding confidence in his skill as an experienced politician with a proven ability to work with micro, as well as macro, issues.

 

After thanking all those who elected him, Adam went on to say, “I am delighted in the faith they have shown in me and am honoured to accept the position of party leader”. Additionally, when asked about his view on the task ahead, he confidently stated, “I have no misconceptions of the difficulty I am faced with. However, these are ideal times for the LPUK to discuss matters pertaining to the protection of personal freedom, reducing state interference generally, and rolling back the nanny state that has permeated into our everyday existence”. Each stance placing Adam in the very mainstream of inherited Libertarian thought.

 

Taking up his duties from Saturday 3rd October 2015, Adam intends to address the party shortly thereafter and table a number of strategies to increase membership, develop further contacts with other advocates of liberty, while raising public awareness of alternatives to “Big Government” in both theory and practice.

 

For further information contact David Parry Press Officer
 

Manifesto 2015

LIBERTARIAN PARTY MANIFESTO 2015

INTRODUCTION

This 2015 General Election is being fought on the interests of the two major political parties not on
the interests of the people of the United Kingdom.
Labour is fighting on the basis of public sector privilege in the NHS, it has very little else it can
credibly fight a campaign on. They are challenged strongly in Scotland by the SNP and damaged by
the far left Greens in England.
The Conservatives are fighting UKIP on the perennial issue of Europe and Immigration.
The Liberal Democrats appear to be heading for electoral oblivion and are simply going through the
motions.

The Libertarian Party believes that the main issue that is not being addressed is that of the
Constitution, It is no longer business as usual as the Scottish Referendum showed. The SNP has
quadrupled its membership and could dictate public policy on the basis of holding the balance of
power.

In the 800th year of Magna Carta we need to have a constitutional convention and accept that the
United Kingdom is rapidly heading for a de facto Federal Kingdom. People are grown up, they want
more of a say, referenda Swiss style should be the norm on both national and local issues not the
exception. This includes membership of the European Union.

It is time we moved from a Representative Democracy to a Direct Democracy where our vote matters,
first past the post is no longer just or sane. All schools of political thought should be heard.
Finally the ‘D’ word has to be addressed- our national debt of £1.4 Trillion has to be paid down, either
through a specific Tax- the ‘Brown’ Tax or by a reduced State.

Switzerland and other countries in their Constitutions have a prohibition on the State borrowing above
a certain limit. We need to enshrine this into our Constitution and have it codified.

-Andrew Withers
LPUK Party Leader

BALANCING THE STATE
The Libertarian Party is aware that for many people the State is an unfeeling unresponsive animal
especially when things go wrong. The NHS, HMRC and others are state institutions where state
employees enjoy virtual entrenched immunity from prosecution other than by the very rich. This has
led to declining standards of civic behaviour.

The Libertarian Party is committed to –
• Making Misconduct in Public Office a statutory offence.
• This proposal was killed off by Jack Straw on 9th December 2008 as Minister of Justice.
Misconduct in Public Office is still a common law offence, but with high walls to overcome to
bring charges against a corrupt and incompetent public servant.
• State Compensation for those injured by the State
• Ensuring the State makes compensation to the individual by implementing the Law Commission
Report on Administrative Redress: Public Bodies and the Citizen
• Restoring the impeachment process for public servants that abuse their position including Ministers
of State.
• There will be an ‘recall’ system for MP’s whose standard of behaviour brings the institution into
disrepute on a local referendum

The Libertarian Party will establish local tribunals or Ombudsmen made up of lay citizens elected to
the position with a legal advisor to assist to ensure that complaints about public servants and public
bodies are heard quickly. Each complaint to be heard with six weeks before referring to a Judge to
decide whether the CPS will be directed to prosecute on the citizen’s behalf.

2015 is the 800th Anniversary of the sealing of the Magna Carta. This was a peace agreement that
lasted a matter of weeks. The Libertarian Party is committed to a written Constitution that protects the
individual against the State and to have the Magna Carta and other documents codified into a single
constitution. The rights sought from Magna Carta down to the 1951 European Declaration of Human
Rights have been continually usurped.

• The party takes as its model the Swiss Constitution of 1999.
• A Constitutional Court would be established.
• The Monarch under law would be the head of State, but subject to the Constitution.

This stable country with a devolution of power to its diverse cantons with different languages and
religions is our preferred model.

England alone out of the United Kingdom is disenfranchised amongst the home Nations not having a
parliament of its own. The Scottish Referendum showed that there is a constitutional deficit that needs
to be addressed in the name of the people of these isles, not a party political fit up to deny the people
an expression of its free will.

Our policy is that we would adopt either the traditional counties with multi seat constituencies with
proportional voting as being the only rational way for the country to have representative government
or the return of the 1000 year old seven English Saxon kingdoms as the basis of public administration
together with Ulster, Wales ,Scotland and Kernow , emulating the German Lander or Swiss Cantons.
Each would determine and have its own tax raising powers that will be devolved from Whitehall.

Both House of Commons and Lords would be by popular election and not by right of birth. To this
end a separate English Parliament would be established outside of London.
Westminster would only deal with Defence and Foreign affairs. The House of Commons would be
reduced to two hundred members and shall only sit from September to December each year an the
basis that the less time sitting the less interference in the life of the individual citizen.
The House of Lords would be abolished and replaced by an elected 100 person chamber to deal with
matters of that affect the British Isles as a whole with directed elected representatives from each of the home nations. This chamber would be bound to put its deliberations to the people by referenda, and
to be bound by it.

This devolution of powers cannot be made without first withdrawing from the European Union, to
counter the risk of the country becoming subservient regions to Brussels and the European Union.

The Military and Police would swear allegiance to the Constitution.
No clergyman from whatever faith shall have the right to a seat unless elected.
All public honours and decorations other than proven military service shall set aside. No public
servant shall receive an honour as a matter of course for doing a job that they are already paid to do.
The honours system has become a degraded and corrosive form of patronage.

DEFENCE
Following the Crimean War disaster in 1856, the British Army was overhauled by Edward Cardwell
Secretary of State for War in 1868, determined on a programme of reform to overcome the
incompetence and maladministration of our armed forces.

At a time when we have more admirals than ships and aircraft carriers with no supply of aircraft to
land on them, together with there being more civil servants working in the MOD than full time
soldiers there is a requirement for a ‘Cardwell 2’.

Our aim is to ensure a strong, independent, sovereign nation. This requires a well funded, trained and
equipped professional Armed Forces (both full time and Reservist), geared for the defence of our
nation and shipping, a policy called Armed Neutrality.

National Defence is one of the few legitimate reasons for the State to exist. This is different to
mounting wars in support of other nations and invading other sovereign nations on the command of
the Prime Minster exercising the Royal Prerogative. The Libertarian Party follows the Jeffersonian
line of “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none.

• Our Armed Forces need to be able to make an enemy think twice, so must have the ability to
project force rapidly, globally and flexibly in focused ways, e.g. submarines, amphibious assault,
Marines, Special Forces.
• To protect supply lines and commercial shipping and fisheries from piracy and other interference
will require a suitably sized fleet of Corvettes, Frigates and associated support craft.
• Reformation of Volunteer Yeomanry on a county basis for 18-25 year olds wishing to enlist as part
time soldiers with no requirement to serve overseas and to be paid. This based on the Swiss Militia
system.
• Maintain membership of NATO while in the National Interest.
• Maintain strong ties with non-aggressive Commonwealth countries.
• Any nuclear deterrent to be made truly independent, retained maintained and eventually replaced in
the foreseeable future.
• The establishment of a separate military pension over and above the State pension for those that
have served in the armed forces.
• The establishment of separate military hospitals for those servicemen and ex-servicemen and their
families.
• The establishment of a living wage for the armed forces
• A programme of demolition of old housing and building of modern accommodation using the
disposal of MOD assets.

This is to establish real substance to the ‘Military Covenant’ which should be on the statute book.
Military Pensions by the State should be seen not as entitlements but as rewards for actual service.

IMMIGRATION OVERVIEW
Our immigration policy will be points based whilst the State provided Welfare System exists. The
core tenet is that there should be free movement of peoples. Anybody arriving in the country should
have no expectation of being supported by the State, subsidised housing or any benefits of any kind.

• The state will not issue any NI numbers to anybody not born in this country, or has made not less
than five years contribution in payments to an NI scheme.
• Anybody granted a residency permit will be obliged to demonstrate that they have adequate
medical insurance.
• In parallel, we will establish bilateral agreements with countries to enable free flows of people.
• Longer term, and in conjunction with the shrinking of our unsustainable current Welfare System,
we are committed to pursuing an open borders policy towards those who would wish to come to the
United Kingdom in order to contribute to our economy and peaceful shores.
• Totally free movement of people into the UK is not practical whilst we have a large welfare state
and other countries are themselves not broadly Libertarian in nature.
• A free flow notwithstanding, any Libertarian government will reserve the right to eject or refuse
entry to foreign nationals convicted in a court of law as part of the Government’s prime role in
protecting the population and maintaining Rule of Law.
• The UK shall have full control over its immigration policy, with any right of final appeal remaining
within the UK.
• Asylum Seekers must present at a UK border or at the British Embassy of a neighbouring country
to their own, otherwise their claim shall not be accepted.
• Those refusing to declare originating country and accept that the failure of their application will
result in their return shall be denied entry, and any right to seek asylum will be refused outright
without appeal.
• Asylum seekers to be held “air side” while their case is heard as swiftly as possible, meaning
weeks, not months or years. This shall not apply to children under the age of 15.
• End automatic access to education and resources for any child who presents itself to the authorities,
i.e. vouchers will not be available.
• We believe any concept of a mass “amnesty”, actual or de facto forgiveness for illegal immigration
undermines Rule of Law and as such will not be entertained.
• The policies above are strict but are drawn up in regard to those who approach the process lawfully
and follow the rules, not those who try and bend the rules or bootstrap their way in.
• Acceptance into the armed forces will be dealt with by the Ministry of Defence.

THE RULE OF LAW
Freedoms won for us by the blood of our ancestors have been seriously eroded over the decades, and
this erosion is gaining speed and must be halted and reversed. It is a core responsibility of the State to enable the citizens to go safely about their lawful business without let or hindrance.
A central tenet of Libertarianism is that we are all equal before the Law from the mightiest to the
poorest. This is the Rule of Law.

We have car insurance, we have life assurance, yet so few of us carry Legal insurance. Going to Law
to protect an interest or to defend yourself is frustrating and seriously injurious to your wealth.
The Libertarian Party will advocate an insurance scheme to balance out the individual against the
State or the wealthy abusing the legal system.

County prosecutors elected at the same time as MP’s will defend the individual or prosecute the
powerful and the State on behalf of the individual, paid for by this insurance scheme.

Unenforceable Law is bad Law, the Libertarian Party will advocate that after thirty years each Law on
the statute book is reviewed and has a sunset on its provisions.

Law that is clearly not understood by the Layman is bad law. It should not need a thousand pages of
Civil Procedure Rules to enable any citizen to obtain both Justice and redress.

The Libertarian Party wants less Law and regulation, replacing it with enforceable Laws. This is on
the basis that what which is not proscribed is free to do, rather than the State ‘giving freedom or
licence to carry out and activity.

Police Chief Constables to be locally elected, and given a large amount of autonomy.
We expect this to:
• Drastically simplify and reform Police/CPS targets, now the remit of the Chief Constable, and to
remove the desire to prosecute innocent parties.
• A reduction in paperwork to enable more beat officers to remain on patrol for as long as possible.
• We will undertake a review of the PCSO concept, with the potential to recruit those capable into
the main police force, and to disband the remainder.
• Limit retention of DNA only in the event of a conviction, and to discard after that conviction is
spent.
We will reaffirm the Nine Peelian Principles. These are:
1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police
actions.
3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the Law.
4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the
necessity of the use of physical force
5. Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly
demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore
order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic
tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only
members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent
upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp
the powers of the judiciary.
9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of
police action in dealing with it.

Furthermore-
• Disorder to be handled via the courts, not on-the-spot fines, which we believe are unconstitutional
as laid out in the 1689 Bill of Rights.
• Repeal inhibitions to “right to lawful assembly”.
• Wiretap evidence to be permitted as evidence in court cases if obtained with a warrant.
• Undertake a review to consider returning juries to all criminal trials.
• Immediate repeal of Control Orders.
• Implement a maximum period for detention without charge of 48 hours; arrests should be
evidenced based, not fishing expeditions.
• Decriminalisation of all sexual activity related to between consenting adults
• Roll back the right of government agents to enter property without a warrant issued by a judge.

Prisons-
We will ensure that sufficient prison places are available to make capacity not a factor in detention,
bail or sentencing decisions.
Make prison harsher for uncooperative inmates as necessary while rewarding cooperation.
End the practice of using regular prisons for the incarceration of the mentally ill.
Life to mean life, and an end to early release of the violent or abuser.
No consideration for age or gender should influence sentencing, especially with access orders for
children.
We will undertake a review to examine the options available for the provision of training and
educational facilities within prisons, and also investigate the possibility of prisoners being able to
perform paid work whilst incarcerated should they wish.
Ensure first time remand prisoners are kept separate from other inmates.
Capital Punishment-
The Libertarian Party is unequivocally opposed to the death penalty by the State.
Torture-
The Libertarian Party believes that the use of torture is against the Rule of Law.

THE WELFARE STATE
The welfare state was promoted on the false premise that the State could look after the individual
from ‘Cradle to Grave’, a phrase that is no longer heard. This undertaking was in return for oppressive
levels of taxation.

That ‘social contract’ has been breached repeatedly by the State and the Welfare State has become a
by word for social conditioning and has unleashed an army of bureaucrats on the population.
All these changes will be phased in over a twenty year period. All accident and emergency services
will remain free at the point of delivery.

As an organisation the NHS has obscured its failings through a political ‘sacred cow’ status, this
cannot continue other than through financial collapse.

1. THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE
It is our proposal as an interim measure that National Insurance becomes a true insurance
entity for health provision. National Insurance contributions will be paid to not for profit
organisations whose board members are elected and are disconnected from politicians much
as the Bank of England is.

The holding of a NI membership means the patient will receive appropriate treatment from
whatever source including overseas and this will be paid for by the National Insurance Board.
Should you elect to take out your own medical insurance you will be entitled to opt out of the
National Insurance Scheme. Employers can offer medical insurance as part of an employee’s
contract. This will not be a taxable benefit.

The National Insurance Board will not own or operate any hospital, but will purchase services
from clean safe hospitals from whatever quarter on the basis of patients before public
privilege.

The National Health Boards shall consist of an English Board, Scottish Board, Ulster Board
and Welsh Board. They shall be fully independent of regional government interference.
Elective cosmetic procedures will not be funded by National Insurance boards.

Should each board wish to increase the rates they wish to take, this shall be put to the opted in
members of the scheme to be agreed by a referendum.

Non Residents arriving at their port of entry show that they have adequate Health Insurance
for the length of their stay. This will be reflected in the cost of a visa.

The central premise should be that National Insurance should reflect the true cost of the
service provided on an annual basis.

GP services will also be paid for by the National Insurance Board, each GP practice having to
demonstrate that it can provide 24 hour coverage on a local basis to alleviate A&E services.
Medical incompetence should be referred to a no fault compensation scheme so those deaths and
injuries can be compensated in months not decades.

Emergency Services-
The RNLI has existed since 1824, was granted charitable status in 1860 and is a registered Charity. The Air Ambulance charities are continuing this honourable tradition of voluntarism We propose that any individual or business that contributes to such charities should be able to set these contributions against taxation. Thus promoting localism and the reduction of bureaucracy.

We also propose this concept be extended to volunteer fire services and ambulance services, together with a volunteer civil defence charity. Much of the 2014 response to the flooding in Somerset was made by local volunteers not the state or the military. 18-24 year olds who volunteer for these services for three years will be granted a sponsored University or further education course for three years.

Medical Training-
We propose that anybody undertaking any professional medical qualification or nursing qualification in United Kingdom should not be required to pay tuition fees on the basis that they contract to work within the United Kingdom for a period of five years or volunteer to work in a developing country for two years. it is iniquitous that the current NHS relies on doctors from developing countries to make up for the training gap. Any company, charity, corporation or individual who sponsors medical trainees shall be exempt from taxation to the level of the sponsorship.

2. THE WELFARE STATE
All pension and unemployment provision will be transitioned to private provision over a twenty year period to non profit trusts or insurance companies, Such premiums shall not be treated as taxable. All such funds remain the asset of the individual.The system of child benefit will gradually phased out, but restricted to two children only. This benefit will not be paid outside of the UK jurisdiction.

ECONOMY
• Our short-term goal will be to reduce and simplify taxation and shift it towards consumption not
income, to increase transparency and accountability.
• Begin repayment of the National Debt and to reduce the payment of unsustainable monthly interest
payments . Our long term goal is to have a vibrant, transparent, open, honest, low-tax, sustainable
and true market economy, in which the Pound Sterling value is preserved and little or no National
Debt exists.
• We understand that there is a risk to everybody’s wealth should the State decide to emulate Cyprus
and seize a percentage of all wealth. Therefore the choices are further reduction in spending or a
tax for a period of five years to reduce the debt. If the latter course is adopted it will be applied on
the same basis as the German Re Unification Tax, and we would propose to call this after a former
Prime Minister ‘ The Brown Tax’
• This would be written into a Swiss style constitution that forbids the State on our behalf to
overspend.
• The State has a responsibility to not destabilise the economy nor create government debt, which is
both a tax on the existing population and a mortgage on our children’s future.
FREE MARKETS
• Libertarians believe passionately in free markets. And when we say ‘free markets’ we mean exactly
that—people and organisations trading freely, honestly and voluntarily, for the benefit of all.
• Some lobby groups use the term ‘free markets’ to mean the economic rule over us by faceless
corporations. Such corporatism (sometimes called political capitalism)is opposed by libertarians,
and many of our policy proposals are squarely aimed at tackling this abuse by monopolies, cartels
and regulation.
• Attempts to reform our economic system would founder if we ignore one of the major underlying
structural issues; the question of how our money supply is created.
Income and Corporation Taxes-
• Personal Income Tax to be abolished. Initially the poorest will be taken out of income tax with a
£21,000 personal allowance and a flat rate above that.
• Corporation Tax lowered to 10% to encourage business and commerce to be based in the UK. The
Party is committed to investigate the viability of a 5-year exemption from Corporation Tax for
start-ups.
• Inheritance Tax and Capital Gains Tax abolished in first Libertarian parliamentary term.
Local Taxation Areas-
• As the Libertarian Party advocates a Swiss style devolution, the Party would not have a standard
tax rate across the country.
• Low or differential Tax in different areas would create competition for business to move, locate or
set up in a low tax area.

Local Banking Groups-
The Libertarian Party advocates the immediate breaking up of the insolvent, bailed out banks and
placing them into administration and the setting up of locally owned commercial banks whose banking licence is based on their ability to lend or invest in small to medium sized business.
‘Too big to fail, means it is too big to start with’

‘The Spending Plan’-
The Libertarian Party endorses ‘The Spending Plan’ produced by the Tax Payers Alliance as
attempting to bring some honesty back into Elections where the moon is promised and could never be
delivered.

EDUCATION
Tony Blair made a speech that extolled ‘Education, Education, Education’ as a central plank of the Nu
Labour project. The fact that he was addressing public sector workers and really meant ‘Indoctrination, Indoctrination, Indoctrination ‘ sums up the political football that Education is.

Before the 1870 Education Act, the Church had largely founded schools in the name of religious
indoctrination. The State fearful of superior German Education standards introduced ‘State Education’
which has largely become a by word for poor standards and public sector teachers being social workers ramming home political messages on gender, race and many other issues, other than education.

The Libertarian Party advocates the denationalisation and secularisation of education to end this 150
year battle over indoctrination and put power back where it belongs, with the parents.

As an interim measure each child would receive an educational voucher which the parents can use at a
school of their choice, and top up should they so wish. This would ensure that only worthy schools
with high standards would prosper.

The Libertarian Party would ensure that educational trusts that gave scholarships , their donors could
set that off against corporation and personal tax.

The Nu Labour project of fifty per cent of young people going to University was fanciful nonsense.
We need technical educational establishments to train young people in transportable skills. Again
donors to such high standard establishments would set off their donations against tax.

Tertiary education has to be paid for, many universities now rely on foreign fees to pay their way.
Others are just finishing schools. The key to education is in the arts to have superlative standards to
gain entry. In technical and language universities proven ability is the key to access.

Teachers should not be banded, but paid on talent. Poor quality teachers and lecturers will be
removed from their posts, equally there will be no barrier to entry into the profession from business
and the armed services.

Post Military service of five years or more, service personnel will receive an education voucher for
any three year course at tertiary level.

APPENDIX A

FIREARMS OWNERSHIP

Introduction
The question is posed as to why we bother with a certification system for firearms in the UK. As such
this piece must be considered entirely from a UK perspective and is an appraisal of the certification
system. Why do we have one? A question that is easily answered, we have one purely for political
reasons. The current manifestation of the certification system is the unwarranted and unnecessary
desire of Government to instil control over people, their possessions and how they use them hidden
behind a mask of protecting public safety. They could not readily sell you control but they can sell
you fear.

Revisions of firearms legislation and other acts of attrition on civil liberties have resulted in the
fragmented, divisive job creation scheme we call the shotgun and firearms certification system
currently run by UK police forces. In more recent times two well-known tragic but significant events
in 1987 and 1996, have been ruthlessly exploited by political parties to gain emotionally charged
votes. The actually effects of certification has not reduced crime and has served only to categorise
firearms depicting certain firearms as more dangerous than others, however when firearms are used
with safe best practice, we know a firearm is no more dangerous than any other inanimate object.

Considering there needs to be a system of checks and balances to ensure those with certain criminal
convictions and known propensities toward violence, plus some medical conditions, are precluded
from lawful firearms ownership.

This licensing system should default to that ownership being a natural right with authority having to
justify withholding that right subject to background checks. The licensing system should certify the
person, not the item, if an individual is deemed a fit and proper person to own and use, what they own
and use is irrelevant, the person with intent being the danger not an inanimate, non-autonomous
object.

Any system of certification of the individual should not be in the grant of the Police who represent the
force of law imposing the contract of statute issued by government. The certificate issuing authority
should be an independent body such as The Security Industry Authority (SIA) (1), the body that
oversees the provision of security guards and door staff, or a similarly designated issuing body.
The only involvement for the Police Force would be to provide background information resulting
from a request from the SIA, or to have involvement in enforcing the law following the committing of
a criminal act. Similarly Police Force involvement would be required if the system of Certification
were to identify the need to withdraw certification of an individual for reason other than contravention
of the law, for example, on medical advice, but only under the authority of a judge signed warrant.
The system of medical referral currently under consideration should be adopted where again the
certifying body makes reference immediately prior to certificate issue. The Medical Practitioner
being required to notify of any medical or psychiatric condition that precluded the issue of any
certificate, to the individual. It would also be the responsibility of the Medical Practitioner to specify the reason for refusal to exempt the individual rather than a pre-determined default list from
Government.

Note: It is important to understand at this stage that extensive change and/or repeal of a large number
of legislative acts would be required to enable the regime suggested to be implemented. Fragmented
UK firearms legislation does not address all the relevant issues regarding the implementation of a
system defaulting to the freedom of the individual to own and use with an emphasis on authority to
prove unsuitability. Legislation requiring alteration includes various Crime Prevention and Policing
statutes, even some consumer law is impacted, and at the last count some 37 acts of statute were
affected. Some legislation holds default clauses that become enacted by secondary legislation at the
repeal in part, or in whole of related primary legislation, great care is needed to understand the
relationships and their effects.

The relationship between issuing authority and those with whom they liaise to ascertain suitability
shall be subject to minimum service standards.

Requirement for Training-
The current situation regarding the individual once certification has been verified if they shoot on land
consent, or are a target shooter, belonging to a club or association, needs no change. Shooters on land
consent require the land owner’s written permission and must have in place adequate insurance cover
for public liability. The land consent system should be modified to remove the Police classification
for caliber element currently imposed.

Target shooting clubs that affiliate to the NRA of UK require probationary members be subject to a
safety and practical course prior to being issued full club membership and unsupervised range access,
this requires no change and is sufficient to purpose. Non NRA of UK affiliated clubs must as part of
their range certification by MOD have conditions requiring as a minimum a mentoring scheme for
probationary members with a similarly structured path to full membership. If this latter is not
currently a wholly encompassing requirement, consideration should be given to how competence is
assured.

Firearms possessed for Self Defence-
Use of a firearm for self- defence is not a firearms legislation matter, it’s a self-defence, and as
mentioned earlier a crime prevention law issue.

Firearms for self-defence would need to become a legitimate reason for ownership and would be
subject to the same freedoms of possessions as for any other reason, similarly the certification would
follow the same pattern described earlier in becoming a natural right unless the authorities can prove
ownership and use is a defined threat to public safety.

Shooting club ownership would not need to be a pre-requisite but in order for the certificate issuing
body to satisfy its duty of care any certificate would need to be endorsed with competence training in
firearms safe use and storage, law governing self-defence, and situational awareness and how to avoid
conflict, all carried out by a competent training organisation. Once these competences are obtained
they should be subject to refresher at certificate review. These latter issues would need to be fulfilled
prior to acquisition of a firearm for this purpose.

Administration-
Government is through ACPO developing an online certification regime which is being rolled out in
stages. Whilst the specification for this is at time of writing unknown it would be recommended that
any online system shall as a minimum contain the following functionality:

The requirement to apply to authority to own and use firearms of any category would be instigated by
the man or woman expressing a desire to purchase from a retailer and be entered into the system by
the retailer who would designate the buyer as a new purchaser, the safeguard would be the lack of
legitimate numerical identifier recognised by the system.
• Create a database. (1)
• Individual user accounts for Manufacturers and Importers. Every firearms made has unique
serial number entered into the database at birth and assigned to the maker or importer.
• Firearms certificate issuers have an administrator account that updates with any online data
entry from any source.
• Applications for certificates are made online and at the same time a unique user account is
established. Relevant checks are confirmed and authorities issued via database notifications.
Any limited documentation can be made available for download and protected against edit.
• Maker or Importer assigns firearms to Dealer at purchase, Dealer accepts receipt.
• Individual issued with unique certificate number as now with perhaps credit card style
certificate issued, or similar as stated above.
• Individual purchases firearm from dealer, database updated immediately with purchaser ID
on dealer account and Admin account. New buyer account will trigger background checks at
this point, Firearm cannot be issued to buyer until retailer is given clearance from certificate
issuer, further prevented by retailer terms and conditions of trading, and penalty is immediate
loss of license to trade, confiscation of stock under judge signed warrant.
• On issue individual is responsible for updating their user account within 72hrs of purchase to
confirm entries as now.
• Individual sells to Individual and carries out transfer using the same criteria as purchase from
dealer.
• Ammunition purchase is recorded in same manner as firearm purchase. (Optional)
• Database issues immediate notification e-mail to administrator at conclusion of each
transaction.

The above process removes the need for separate SG/FAC issue. Every firearm, and if desired, round
of ammunition, is tracked from manufacture or import to purchase. As now SG shells need not be
included.

Authorities have a clear and up to date track of all firearms (and ammunition). The database can flag
ammunition purchases over a preset database default amount by any one individual if required
allowing further investigation.

In conclusion, the narrative above sets out to sow the seeds of an idea that could potentially address
the civil liberties, public safety, public interest and personal freedoms of choice that must be
considered for there to be an effective but proportionate approach to firearms ownership. It sets out
the basis of a plan to establish satisfying the areas of concern but removes the most divisive element
of all, the control by the state of the personal choice for individuals.

In Summary-
Firearms ownership and use becomes a natural right but subject to intervention on criminal or medical
grounds.
• As a natural right the State must prove its case for exclusion.
• Firearms administration is removed from state responsibility.
• State retains intervention on evidential grounds subject to judicial authority.
• Competence training for sporting possession, to be unchanged.
Competence for defensive use is conditional for certificate endorsement.
• Use of firearm for defensive use without competence endorsement is mandated within selfdefence
legislation and treated on case by case basis.
• Individuals do not apply for the right to possess but will incur a cooling off period of (x) days
before a firearm may be released to a buyer to allow background checks to take place.
• A register of firearms ownership is available to authority via issuing authority on production
of a judge signed warrant.

Conclusion
The narrative above sets out to sow the seeds of an idea that could potentially address the civil
liberties, public safety, public interest and personal freedoms of choice that must be considered for
there to be an effective but proportionate approach to firearms ownership. It sets out the basis of a
plan to establish satisfying the areas of concern but removes the most divisive element of all, the
control by the state of the personal choices of individuals.

The Libertarian Party UK does not however extend these proposals to automatic weapons or military
assault weapons. It is difficult to see how these proposals will elicit public support. However in line
with our defence proposals, that county yeomanry that should form the basis of our depleted defence
capability should have access to such weapons in local secure facilities.

References:
1. Richard Law & Peter Brooksmith publication ‘Does the trigger pull the finger’ April 2011.cp

History

The Libertarian Party of the United Kingdom was founded January 1st 2008, it is a Constitutional Minarchist (small state, low tax) Party, we are strongly influenced by the writings of Robert Nozick 1938-2002. In a modern technological society there has to be a minimal state to maintain defence and to maintain a stable framework of justice to provide the enforcement of contracts.

Robert Nozick

Robert Nozick

The example of Sir John Cowperthwaite 1915-2006 as Financial Secretary of Hong Kong from 1961 to 1971. His introduction of free market economic policies are widely credited with turning postwar Hong Kong into a thriving global financial centre.

Cowperthwaite

Sir John Cowperthwaite

The LP-UK traces its roots back to the Classical Liberal ideas of John Locke 1632-1704, the Party does not consider itself Anarcho-Capitalist and campaigns for a Constitutional Settlement based on Swiss style direct democracy and referenda. It holds that ‘representative democracy’ has ran its course only creating a political elite and a bloated centralised bureaucracy.

John Locke

John Locke

In 2012 The party amended its Constitution to become a Federal Party consisting of-

London & South East
Wessex and Kernow
Mercia
North
East Anglia
Essex
Wales
Scotland *
Northern Ireland**

Each Region is Autonomous, only requiring to conform to the requirements of reporting to the Electoral Commission under the terms of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. This Act has introduced penalties and fines for non-compliance. The Act has recently been amended to now include commercial loans that were previously not required to be declared.

• Scotland has become a fully independent entity The Scottish Libertarian Party, the LP-UK and the SLP have a cooperation agreement.
• Northern Ireland is registered as separate party as it operates under a different legal framework

In March 2014 The Libertarian Party –UK became a founding member of the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties

Liberal Democratic Party (Australia)
Parti Libertarien (Belgium)
Libertarian Party of Canada
Free Citizens Party (Czech Republic)
Mouvement des Libertariens (France)
Partei der Vernunft (Germany)
Movimento Libertario (Italy)
Libertarische Partij (Netherlands)
Liberalistene (Norway)
Libertarian Party of Russia
Scottish Libertarian Party
Libertarian Party of South Africa
Partido Libertario (Spain)
Unabhängigkeitspartei up! (Switzerland)
Libertarian Party (US)

(Photos of Locke, Cowperthwaite,Nozick)

Constitutional Convention

The Libertarian Party has long argued for fundamental Constitutional change on the Swiss model of devolved direct democracy with the use of referenda.

With a turn out of 85% the Scottish Referendum has showed that the people can and should be trusted with fundamental decisions.

For the Libertarian Party there is ample proof that our so called ‘representative ‘ democracy with first past the post gerrymandering is sclerotic and bust.

Wars, reckless spending, MPs expenses from the ‘Rotten Parliament’ and now the Scottish Referendum shows we must have change.

The West Lothian question was asked in 1978. Thirty five years to provide an answer is intolerable.

Cameron has rejected an English Parliament. He is out of tune with the will of the people in England. He is also out of time. The sleeping giant has awoken. He must stand aside.

All three party leaders have promised greater powers for Scotland and retention of the Barnett formula. This was without reference to Parliament and the whole of the people of these isles. This is not acceptable.

Alex Salmond has rendered a service to the union in exposing the flawed system we labour under.

We call for a Constitutional Convention that all shades of political opinion are consulted. Leaving the matter to William Hague and tired party hacks is not acceptable.

#indyref

Scottish Referendum

The events surrounding the Scottish Independence Referendum over the last few weeks begs the question why are we allowing ourselves to be ruled by such ruthless incompetents in both Whitehall and Westminster.

Firstly the Libertarian Party UK position on the role of devolved Government and the non-existent Constitution of the current United Kingdom:

The Libertarian Party in the United Kingdom entered into an agreement with the Scottish Libertarian Party in 2013, as it is only right and just that the political realities are recognised. This was done cordially and has allowed both parties to cooperate going forward.

The Libertarian Party has a clear policy on devolved government and believes that it is a good thing. Germany has had its Länder, or States since 1949, to forestall the rise of another Hitler and to avoid all power being centralised in Berlin. Germany is of course in the EU. Even in Germany, voters in Saxony have returned anti-EU candidates.

Our role model is the Cantonal Government of Switzerland.

The Cantons have tax competition and follows the Libertarian dictum that  the government should be as near to the people as possible. There is direct democracy through referendum where everybody’s vote counts. Switzerland is not part of the EU.

Ulster and Wales along with Scotland have devolved government, although bizarrely enough the English, who are subsidising the United Kingdom, are not consulted, nor do they have devolved Government.

LPUK policy is to give devolved government to the Counties of everything from Whitehall other than defence and foreign affairs. This will remove a huge raft of government and eradicate the need for professional politicians who have never held down a full time job in the real world.

For historical reasons and cultural continuity, these devolved powers would be based on the ancient Saxon Kingdoms;  Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria, East Anglia, Sussex, Essex and Kent, plus  Wales, Northern Ireland and Kernow.
We reject any notion this is all part of a plot by the EU to break up the country. These divisions are a thousand years old and it is LPUK policy to leave the EU at the earliest opportunity.

Anybody who thinks that the status quo will continue after September 18th is hoping against hope as did the Stasi in 1989. The genie is out of the bottle, and the courage has to be found to come up with a viable alternative and release the energies and talent of the current United Kingdom held in check by a political elite that live in the magical Kingdom surrounded by M25.

To do this we will need a written Constitution that protects the rights of the individual and set down our constitutional arrangements on defence and foreign affairs.

Messrs Cameron, Clegg and Miliband have done the people of these Isles a service. They have demonstrated that they are the result of the first past the post electoral system, that is unresponsive in an alleged ‘representative democracy’. They have been utterly complacent, finally panicking and flying to Scotland in the dying days of a referendum offering incentives after the postal votes have been made. The flying of the Saltire in England stunt was both humiliating and puerile.

After the 18th September, we should all have a say in a Constitutional Convention, dealing with our electoral system, exiting the EU and making a new political settlement.

As to Cameron, Clegg and Miliband, they should leave the political stage and resign. They have brought nothing but confusion and instability.

It’s the Constitution Stupid!

Or rather the lack of one.

The United Kingdom is just one of four countries in the world that does not have a written Constitution.  There is absolutely nothing to protect the individual or, come to that, whole communities, towns and cities from the arbitrary decisions of a small Whitehall clique fronted by a gaggle of parliamentary yes-men all eager to climb up the greasy pole of power.

London is now acting like a Renaissance Italian City State seeking to dominate the rest of the country with values and short term fixes that are a good fit for London, but not for elsewhere.  Like the City States of old when they lose their raison d’etre, ie a finance power house,  it begins to cede power to stronger entities, in this case Brussels.

The political classes know the game is up.  Their authority is fatally weakened.  That is why they are passing more and more laws, regulations and restrictions to bind the general public.  Ultimately it does not matter who you vote for.  The Civil Servants will always get in.

The Libertarian Party believes in the peaceful transition to a Swiss style Cantonal Constitution where every vote counts and local and national governments reflect the vote accurately through proportional representation.

+++