David Cameron doesn't want any country to ratify the Lisbon Treaty including the final two countries. Unfortunately all the other countries already have ratified it. Are you starting to think that David Cameron is in a minority? Even in his party there is a split. Eurosceptics are asking for a commitment to a referendum. He won't give it.
I had thought about asking a dozen or so people whether they would vote for a referendum in Britain on the Lisbon treaty but after asking four times I gave up. Nobody knows about this treaty, so let me explain.
If we want to work with neighbouring countries on matters that concern us all then we need a mechanism to do so. The current arrangements were made when there were 15 countries and now there are 27 so we need new arrangements, hence the treaty. It includes a section that shows a commitment to principles like freedom and justice. It paves the way for a permanent president and an EU foreign minister, and there are some changes like the way vetoes work.
The question should not be whether we want a referendum on the management of procedures within the EU. Most people don't have insight into the mechanisms of European government. If we do want to have a referendum it should be concerned with our membership. There are a lot of people who feel we should not be part of the EU. They don't care about details of the Lisbon Treaty. They just want to vote no to Europe. So why not have a referendum on EU membership?
Change the world
Wednesday, 7 October 2009
Tuesday, 6 October 2009
Natural homes for Conservatives
Do you want to work an extra year before you retire? This is the proposal from the Conservatives who are, according to Eric Pickles, the party of civil liberties. They are also the party that will get people off benefits and back to work. If you have your own story of unemployment then you will realise that life is not black and white, for example if you have any skill whatsoever you may find that it is difficult to get work in your field. Are the Tories really saying they want brain surgeons to work at McDonalds? Pick your own example of skilled worker and unskilled work.
A few problems arise when you make headlines about people cheating the system. Firstly they are saying that people on benefits are spongers. If some people are cheating the system and getting paid allowances to which they are not entitiled then there are already processes by which these people may be caught. It may be necessary to tighten up these procedures but by making these headlines the Tories, the party of the rich, are stigmatising everyone on benefits and those working to police the system.
They are also proposing that the retirement age will increase from 65 to 66. Well thanks for that. When I was a teenager in the 70s I was supposed to be retiring at 50 because of North Sea oil. With this proposal we will save vast amounts on pension but who are the real winners. Of course the answer is the rich who can retire whenever they wish without resorting to a state pension.
When Eric Pickles tells us that the Conservatives are the natural party for members of every other party then it is definitely time that he looked at policy differences, how the party is funded, how he views a fair voting system and many other points that need a few more blogs. The only natural home for Conservatives who wish to be told their policies at conference is the Conservative Party.
Change the world
A few problems arise when you make headlines about people cheating the system. Firstly they are saying that people on benefits are spongers. If some people are cheating the system and getting paid allowances to which they are not entitiled then there are already processes by which these people may be caught. It may be necessary to tighten up these procedures but by making these headlines the Tories, the party of the rich, are stigmatising everyone on benefits and those working to police the system.
They are also proposing that the retirement age will increase from 65 to 66. Well thanks for that. When I was a teenager in the 70s I was supposed to be retiring at 50 because of North Sea oil. With this proposal we will save vast amounts on pension but who are the real winners. Of course the answer is the rich who can retire whenever they wish without resorting to a state pension.
When Eric Pickles tells us that the Conservatives are the natural party for members of every other party then it is definitely time that he looked at policy differences, how the party is funded, how he views a fair voting system and many other points that need a few more blogs. The only natural home for Conservatives who wish to be told their policies at conference is the Conservative Party.
Change the world
Monday, 5 October 2009
Emphasise tax loopholes not cutting benefits
Yesterday's blog pointed out that insurance for care homes is really significant for the poor and really not significant for the rich. Well done to the Conservatives for supporting the rich. Today the headline is to cut benefits. Well you don't get rich on benefits and if you want to get a second opinion then ask any Tory MP. They can't live on the pittance they call an MP's wage.
It is really hard to take any lectures on poverty from people who can't live on the "rations" that are given to MPs. In previous blogs I have written that the motivation behind the words is more important than the words themselves, and it is headlines like "Tories spell out benefit cut plan" that make it clear which side their bread is buttered. Why don't they make headlines about closing tax loopholes for the rich.
The Rolling Stones manage to pay tax at 1.6%. How about that for everyone's tax payments.
Change the world.
It is really hard to take any lectures on poverty from people who can't live on the "rations" that are given to MPs. In previous blogs I have written that the motivation behind the words is more important than the words themselves, and it is headlines like "Tories spell out benefit cut plan" that make it clear which side their bread is buttered. Why don't they make headlines about closing tax loopholes for the rich.
The Rolling Stones manage to pay tax at 1.6%. How about that for everyone's tax payments.
Change the world.
Sunday, 4 October 2009
Tories devise a worse home protection scheme
It is now the C0nservatives' turn for dishing out policy to their members. I did mention Gordon's announcements last week as he pushed policy onto the members. How would I like policy to be announced? That's easy. Let the members debate the pros and cons and then vote.
The first news that I have heard from the Tories is about financing residential care for the elderly without having to sell their homes. This is obviously good news because headlines are made when people sell their houses to pay for such homes. Well look a bit more at the Tory policy and I am afraid that it is fairly easy to pick holes in it. I will keep my comments brief.
A one-off charge of £8 000 will ensure free care in a home. This is based on the average use of a home of around two years and a cost of £52 000. There is one big difference between this rather crude insurance and those on offer at the moment. Presently the costs depend on age and health. If you have a chronic illness then you may need a care home for longer than two years and you are more likely to take up the Tory offer. If you are in good health then you are more likely to take a risk and not pay the £8k.
For those people with savings of less than £23 000 then they will not take up this safety net because they already have one and will already get free care. Of course the problem with safety nets is poverty traps. The people with £31k will not spend £8k because it will mean they fall into the second net. How much can they fritter away before they are pulled up about it? Can they go on nice holidays or buy a nice painting?
The real problem is the mess caused by the recession and the global economy, because we should be following the Scottish example. As in Scotland we should have a safety net of care homes without proviso and we should have no university tuition fees. I was thinking prior to these conferences that the only hope for a continued Labour government in Westminster is to back these options. Now we have a Conservative option which is useful for the rich, not the poor, and it is a scheme which is not as good as those we have at the moment.
Change the world
The first news that I have heard from the Tories is about financing residential care for the elderly without having to sell their homes. This is obviously good news because headlines are made when people sell their houses to pay for such homes. Well look a bit more at the Tory policy and I am afraid that it is fairly easy to pick holes in it. I will keep my comments brief.
A one-off charge of £8 000 will ensure free care in a home. This is based on the average use of a home of around two years and a cost of £52 000. There is one big difference between this rather crude insurance and those on offer at the moment. Presently the costs depend on age and health. If you have a chronic illness then you may need a care home for longer than two years and you are more likely to take up the Tory offer. If you are in good health then you are more likely to take a risk and not pay the £8k.
For those people with savings of less than £23 000 then they will not take up this safety net because they already have one and will already get free care. Of course the problem with safety nets is poverty traps. The people with £31k will not spend £8k because it will mean they fall into the second net. How much can they fritter away before they are pulled up about it? Can they go on nice holidays or buy a nice painting?
The real problem is the mess caused by the recession and the global economy, because we should be following the Scottish example. As in Scotland we should have a safety net of care homes without proviso and we should have no university tuition fees. I was thinking prior to these conferences that the only hope for a continued Labour government in Westminster is to back these options. Now we have a Conservative option which is useful for the rich, not the poor, and it is a scheme which is not as good as those we have at the moment.
Change the world
Saturday, 3 October 2009
Not a good advert for public transport
How do you devise an integrated transport system? Well the easiest answer is to watch Yes Minister and follow the dialogue. A longer answer is to think about how you want people to move around the country. If you think it is best to get people to buy and maintain their own vehicles, travel into the city centres, clog up the streets and then find a parking space then that is basically the system we have now. It has the advantage of giving freedom to individuals and this view will be supported by all car owners.
On the other hand, if you care about the earth's resources and want them used in an appropriate way, if you want to keep costs down, if you want to stop congestion and ease pollution then you need an integrated transport system.
Take the example of travelling round the country. If you offer passes that allow you to travel cheaply then you will use it. Get people onto public transport that is not being used to full capacity and it is a win-win-win situation for the individual for the transport company and for society. It's not too good for manufacturers of private vehicles but times will change anyway and cars have and will become more efficient.
In practice this is not happening. A Canadian relative and his friend are touring Europe and they are with us at the moment. They have bought their pass for French trains but it just wasn't worth it in Britain. This is not a good advert for our rail system and for our attitude towards public transport in general. I for one will continue to use my gas guzzler.
Change the world
On the other hand, if you care about the earth's resources and want them used in an appropriate way, if you want to keep costs down, if you want to stop congestion and ease pollution then you need an integrated transport system.
Take the example of travelling round the country. If you offer passes that allow you to travel cheaply then you will use it. Get people onto public transport that is not being used to full capacity and it is a win-win-win situation for the individual for the transport company and for society. It's not too good for manufacturers of private vehicles but times will change anyway and cars have and will become more efficient.
In practice this is not happening. A Canadian relative and his friend are touring Europe and they are with us at the moment. They have bought their pass for French trains but it just wasn't worth it in Britain. This is not a good advert for our rail system and for our attitude towards public transport in general. I for one will continue to use my gas guzzler.
Change the world
Friday, 2 October 2009
Cut coats according to cloth
I don't think of myself as old, perhaps middle-aged, but not old. As you get older you see changes in society some of which are not good and it is not just reminiscing. At the moment I am thinking of our attitude to debt. My parents grew up with the idea that you saved for something and then bought it. Me too. Now we have this idea that we can enjoy life today and pay for it tomorrow.
Take, for example the private funding initiatives. It doesn't matter what kind of building it is. We can build schools or hospitals and nobody has to pay for it. Unfortunately they do. Even worse, we pay more for the privilege. It may look good to have a lot of new resources but we don't see the hidden costs. Well sometimes we do. My local Jessops camera shop closed last year.
In the Guardian (30/9/09) there is an article about Jessops. Control of this group has been handed over to the banks because of "unrealistic debt-fuelled growth" and Jessops is only the latest in a "string of loan casualties".
It doesn't matter whether it is personal debt caused by working hard for a degree. It doesn't matter if it government borrowing which may win votes but costs us more. It doesn't matter if it is corporate debt. Let's cut our coat according to our cloth.
Change the world
Take, for example the private funding initiatives. It doesn't matter what kind of building it is. We can build schools or hospitals and nobody has to pay for it. Unfortunately they do. Even worse, we pay more for the privilege. It may look good to have a lot of new resources but we don't see the hidden costs. Well sometimes we do. My local Jessops camera shop closed last year.
In the Guardian (30/9/09) there is an article about Jessops. Control of this group has been handed over to the banks because of "unrealistic debt-fuelled growth" and Jessops is only the latest in a "string of loan casualties".
It doesn't matter whether it is personal debt caused by working hard for a degree. It doesn't matter if it government borrowing which may win votes but costs us more. It doesn't matter if it is corporate debt. Let's cut our coat according to our cloth.
Change the world
Thursday, 1 October 2009
Is it time to move to Scotland?
I write blogs each day and I publish them in the early hours of the following morning. So there has been 24 hours since I wrote yesterday's blog and I have had time to think about it. I cannot believe how gentle I was with Gordon's announcements about care homes. Alright I have a vested interest in that I am a deputy manager in a care home, but I am also in the privileged position to recognise the need for these homes. I also recognise that in the future we will have an increasing need for these homes. I am lucky in the sense that there is a waiting list for places in my home, so this is not a personal point but many others are not so lucky. I am not writing this blog to defend my home. It doesn't need defending. However we do have an ageing population and we have to move in the direction of supporting such homes as extra care will be needed.
Yesterday I emphasised the difference between Scotland and England. Today I want to emphasise the need for such homes. I presume that the announcement that those in greatest need will have free care at home means those in greatest financial need. If it means physical, social and psychological need then they will need a care home. So let's take it that Gordon meant financial need. What we will find is that if a care home is needed then more persuasion will be required. How do you take someone out of their house into a home where they may have to sell their house? Perhaps Gordon is not spending much and this headline-grabbing announcement actually means nothing. They may have no savings and no house to sell, but let's presume that it does mean something. Headlines will still be written about the elderly selling their homes in order to receive a place in a residential home.
I was sure that Labour's only hope of gaining some votes was to appeal to voters and put the English on a par with the Scottish. It may be time to move to Scotland.
Change the world
Yesterday I emphasised the difference between Scotland and England. Today I want to emphasise the need for such homes. I presume that the announcement that those in greatest need will have free care at home means those in greatest financial need. If it means physical, social and psychological need then they will need a care home. So let's take it that Gordon meant financial need. What we will find is that if a care home is needed then more persuasion will be required. How do you take someone out of their house into a home where they may have to sell their house? Perhaps Gordon is not spending much and this headline-grabbing announcement actually means nothing. They may have no savings and no house to sell, but let's presume that it does mean something. Headlines will still be written about the elderly selling their homes in order to receive a place in a residential home.
I was sure that Labour's only hope of gaining some votes was to appeal to voters and put the English on a par with the Scottish. It may be time to move to Scotland.
Change the world
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
