We will remember them

Four score and eleven years ago today the armistice was signed to put an end to one of the most deadliest conflicts the world had ever been involved in. More than 15 million soldiers had sacrificed their lives in a war that had lasted four years. Many then believed that such was the blood spilt in the Great War that it would be the War to End All Wars. But now, we do not only reflect on those who died in World War One, but also on the many conflicts that followed thereafter.

Now, 90 years on, the situation is much different. Soldiers are now dying on an almost daily basis in Afghanistan, and some question the motive and justification of the mission. But we must not forget, that if we withdraw our forces from Afghanistan, if we leave our mission incomplete, all of these brave and courageous men would have died in vain. And we must also remember, that they are fighting for peace, fighting so that we would be safer from terrorist attacks from groups such as the Taliban.

Today is the day that we remember all the British troops who have died fighting for Britain, no matter whether it is 1919 or 2009. We will remember them, for they died defending our beloved nation. We will remember them, for they died defending our people. And we will remember them, for they died so that we would be able to enjoy our rights of freedom, justice, and democracy that we take for granted today.

But it is not only the British we should remember - the courage of French, American, and Russian soldiers not only kept their own countries safe, but our nation also. And thus we should also remember and thank our allies, who gave their lives so we could live in a society free from oppression. Yet this is only half the story, we must also remember our enemies. The German, Italian, and Japanese soldiers, who did not subscribe to the extremist ideology of their leaders but were forced into battle, and condemned to a bloody death.

However, in the long term, there is no use looking back and reading the names of those who had died in these numerous conflicts just today - because their heroic actions and deeds would have compensated the fact that they gave the ultimate sacrifice to our country, and their actions in war would live far longer in memory than actions in peacetime. The world does not need one particular day of pomp and ceremony to help us remember - we should already do so each and every day of our lives, as their impact on it is far bigger than what we can add or detract.

But our job is still unfinished, and in the future we will still have to face those who do not subscribe to the majority of the world's view that all men (and women) are born equal and should enjoy the same rights. It is not enough for us to simply remember these men who have died so courageously - but their memories should urge us to work harder to perfect our society, to defend our values, and to ensure that there will not need to be a time where so many lives would need to be sacrificed due to the actions and ideologies so few people. And we seek that one day, governments round the world would adopt the principles of liberty and freedom, of justice and equality, of democracy and a representative government that we are fortunate to consider so close to our hearts.

Gordon Brown and Labour are best placed to lead the country

Though Gordon Brown is seen by many beyond British waters to be the savior of the international banking system, taking decisive action last year to trigger an economic rebound, the year has been tough on him and his Labour Party in Britain. Polls are unfavourable, there have been calls for his resignation, and the Labour Party seem almost certain to be out of office in the next election.

However, the Labour Conference has shown that there is still life in the Labour Party. The Prime Minister knew he needed to deliver a speech that would unite the party and show the electorate that Labour were still the progressive party in Britain. Brown did not disappoint. The speech opened on the Prime Minister's decisive action on the economic crisis, introducing measures including "help for small businesses, targeted tax cuts for millions and advancing investment in roads, rail and education." Although the incumbent party, Brown adopted President Obama's campaign slogan, telling the conference delagates and the whole country that "change" has to influence the many, not just the priveleged few.

The Prime Minister said that while most of other political parties in the G20 knew they had to act to confront the economic downturn, it was only the Conservatives who thought it was best to do nothing. Brown put forward the credentials for the Labour Party to be the party of progress, the party of action, in confronting these crises, unlike the Conservatives.

Though perhaps not as accomplished as a speaker as his American counterpart, Gordon Brown still managed to work the tricolon and anaphora to the full extent, drawing applause from the conference delegates, especially on issues such as the NHS and parliamentary and electoral reform, promising that the House of Lords would be a democratically elected institution.

Brown also called for global cooperation on issues such as climate change and nuclear disarmanent. However, Brown admitted the deficit would be reduced, and promised instead of cutting programmes concerned with education and healthcare. Brown then announced he would raise taxes right at the top, and said that while the Tories keep talking about reducing government debt, their tax plans mean that there would be even less money for services, some of which would have to be cut in a Tory government.

The Prime Minister mentioned the achievements of the Labour Party from 1997, such as the minimum wage, bringing up his predecessors, Neil Kinnock, John Smith, and Tony Blair, who all fought for the minimum wage which the latter was able to make it law. Brown then moved to issues concerning families, crime, and anti-social behaviour, telling delegates that ID cards were not compulsory.

The Labour Party leader moved on to foreign policy, which he had received accolades for worldwide, promising to work with President Obama and the rest of the NATO powers on the mission in Afghanistan, and making sure that terrorism will be less likely to happen in Britain. Brown also mentioned Iran, and told them, "join the international community or face isolation." Brown also promised to spend 0.7% of national income in aid to poorer countries.

The Prime Minister ended his speech firing up the Labour Party, telling delegates and party members to "Never stop believing in the good sense of the British people. Never stop believing we can move forward to a fairer, more responsible, more prosperous Britain. Never stop believing we can make a Britain equal to its best ideals. Never, never stop believing." Brown said that while the challenge may be great for the party to win a fourth term, the rewards will be greater. Brown closed on the fact that the duty of every Labour member in the country was to "stand", "fight", "win", and "serve" for Britain's future.

The Prime Minister closed to a standing ovation lasting several minutes, showing that the Labour Party is united behind its leader, that the Labour Party is ready to fight the next general election, and that the Labour Party would be united in its fight for Britain.

Why the Liberal Democrats may be taken seriously at last

"Vote Liberal Democrat", says the campaign poster. And while the response may be "I'll think about it," the outcome would most likely be a vote for either Labour or the Conservative Party. However, after the expenses scandal, could the Lib Dems finally be taken seriously?

Despite reports that the Lib Dems may profit from the loss of faith in both main parties, their results in the European and local elections did not suggest this. Is this simply because of low voter turnout of Lib Dem voters, or are the Liberal Democrats actually part of the establishment, and voters are looking for other parties, such as the Greens or UKIP.

In the 2010 election, even if their share of the vote does not go up, the Lib Dems could still play a big part in the resulting parliament, as in the event of a Hung Parliament, it would be Lib Dems who would have a say in joining a coalition with perhaps the Conservatives, or perhaps Labour, in deciding the next government. Therefore, it may finally time to pay more attention to what the Lib Dems are saying, as they may well be part of our next government.

Maybe a stronger Liberal Democratic Party may put an end to the two-party political system in the UK, or at least give a strong third party. The Lib Dems may actually be a change, and be more progressive. For the first time in 100 years, the Liberal Party may once again be part of a government, but if that party is led by Nick Clegg, then God help us.

Why Britain needs to invest in the future

During the last year, the UK and the world have seen economic recession, a rise in unemployment, banks merging and failing, and many businesses going bust. Governments around the world spent billions in investing in infrastructure projects to give a boost of the economy, but now, with rising debt many calls have been made to stop investment to make cuts.

These people are right to an extent - many wasteful programmes which do not work should indeed be cut. However, the ceasure of this investment could easily result in the economy going backwards again and leading to a double-dip recession. In this critical situation, we need to continue investing in these programmes in order to keep people at work and keep the economy growing.

While investing in the future does cost large amounts of money, it is positive for the infrastructure and means that the UK can compete with other countries and become a much better place to live. What the public do not understand is that their money is being used to improve Britain as a country, and make their lives better and easier.

Therefore to stop investing in the economy right now would be fatal for the British economy, and especially workers. Unemployment is still rising despite assurances that the recession is ended, we still need to continue investing in big projects so there are jobs available and people can earn a living. Don't forget that government benefits also come from the taxpayer. When the economy recovers fully then that will be the time to slow down the investment and paying back the debt.
The next government, no matter which party, should continue investment, and the Labour government should receive less stick for predicting that the recession would be over by Christmas, because, it seems the prediction is not far away. Although companies are still closing, and unemployment is still rising, which are the real indicators of economic health, there is no doubt that the situation is improving and stocks are slowly rising again to their previous heights.

Why a few celebrities may be good for British politics

After running 43 back-to-back marathons, Eddie Izzard followed in Esther Rantzen's footsteps, announcing that he would be standing as an MP. Obviously, celebrities have ventured into politics before round the world. Most notable included one Hollywood actor Ronald Reagan, who then became Governor Ronald Reagan of California, followed by President Ronald Reagan. Arnold Schwarzenegger has also taken such a course, while in the subcontinent former cricketers Imran Khan and Mohammad Azharuddin have become politicians in Pakistan and India respectively. However, this phenomenon is not present in the United Kingdom, is it time for this to change?

While their main aim is to appeal to the people, politicians are largely disliked, especially after a long time in office. Most celebrities, on the other hand, have a large fan base and are likely to be popular. Therefore, as the politicians are getting the bad press, should celebrities step in and help? After all, Ronald Reagan remained popular despite the fact that his policies were less so. Politics has also been seen as a stage for old boring people, those who seem to have more experience.

However, I believe that celebrities, especially those who are younger, will be able to revolutionise politics. The whole image of politics will be changed. While diehard conservatives may disprove of this, for sure it is time that politics needs a new image and needs to be reformed. Of course, MPs are discussing different electoral systems and even different systems of government, to perhaps one aligned closer to that in the United States. However, no serious reform can ever be achieved unless there happens to be a change in personnel.

The Last Night of the Proms - Pomp, Circumstance, and a new hope

In an economic recession like this, with unemployment still rising it is no surprise that many Britons are unhappy. However, for those whose confidence in the government is dropping and those who feel as if Britain's status in the world stage has been diminishing, well, yesterday showed the Britain's greatness to throw one heck of a party.


Britain has had many great classical composers, and many of these composers saw anniversaries of births or deaths in 2009. Although Georg Frederic Handel, Felix Mendelssohn and Joseph Haydn are not British natives they have had as much influence on British music as Henry Purcell and Edward Elgar. British music is a reflection of British society, it is a delicate mixture of a number of cultures.

The BBC Proms has been a celebration of music in Britain for the past century, and Henry Wood the founder of the promenade and who conducted around 45 series of concerts still remains a presence 65 years after his death. The Proms have seen music and musicians from all over the world come together, culminating in the Last Night of the Proms, last night.

It is the Proms which makes me wonder why thousands of people would want to go to festivals like Glastonbury, and spend days camping during record levels of rainfall. Clearly, Glastonbury is a major part of British culture and the British image, but even for those who do not take a liking to Classical music, the Proms is a totally different spectacle.

While there is the Classical music, in 2009 we had Purcell, Mahler, Haydn and Handel among other composers, while the two solo performers mezzo-soprano Sarah Connoly and Alison Balsom on the trumpet may not be world famous names, they displayed their wonderful talents leading up to the finale of the 2009 Proms. Even if you do not like music, Rule Britannia, Jerusalem, and Land of Hope and Glory makes you feel proud to be British. While Britannia's rule of the waves may be diminishing, while Britains bounds are becoming narrower and narrower, there is still hope of Blake's new Jerusalem in Britain.

While times may be hard, while less people may seem to listen, while influence may be narrower, the Proms show us that there is still hope that Britain would once again, be great.