Taxpayers pay for Labour Party propaganda

Local Conservative Parliamentary Candidate, Gordon Henderson, has accused the Government of misusing taxpayers’ money to pay for Labour Party propaganda.

The accusation follows publication last week of a glossy brochure entitled Building Britain’s Future. Critics, including the BBC, suggested that the document should have been titled: Rebuilding Labour’s Future.

Mr Henderson believes that Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, should come clean about how much the brochure cost to produce and demanded that the Labour Party pay for it from its own coffers, refunding taxpayers if necessary.

Mr Henderson said:

‘I have read through the brochure and it is clearly promoting Labour Party policies and Gordon Brown’s so called “achievements”. Government documents are supposed to be factual and non political. Building Britain’s Future is patently neither factual nor non political

‘As Nick Robinson said on the BBC last week, this brochure is little more than the Labour Party manifesto for the next General Election. That makes it party political propaganda and quite clearly such material should not be funded out of our taxes.

‘And it is not as if the document has been very well thought through. For example on page 84 Gordon Brown promises to “…change the current rules for allocating council and other social housing, enabling local authorities to give more priority to local people...”

‘I simply don’t think that will be possible because of the level of political correctness that bedevils our society thanks to Labour’s so called “Human Rights” legislation.

‘I know of a landlord in Sittingbourne who recently tried to place an advertisement in one of our local newspapers stipulating that he was looking for a “mature British” tenant. There were good legal reasons for setting this criterion, but the newspaper refused to place the ad because of the word “British”.

‘So if a landlord cannot advertise for “British” tenants, how could a local authority prioritise its housing stock for use by “local people” without falling foul of the same ludicrous rules?’