Archive for the ‘Labour’ Category

According to Ed Balls the Government should spend more.

By borrowing more.

Yes, that great beacon of socialism thinks Britain should both increase its deficit AND debt.

As Margaret Thatcher once famously said:

“Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people’s money.”

According to Ed Balls this isn’t a problem, as you can easily acquire more.

He believes that the most important thing to concentrate on economically is growth. On its own, this is something I would welcome – however he seeks to create artificial growth.

Running up a higher debt/deficit for a short-term boost would simply create a stronger, deeper recession. Think of the cuts in certain areas of public spending that are currently planned – imagine how much more severe these would have to be if we borrowed and spent even more.

In context, imagine you’re in £10,000 of debt. You then borrow another £20,000 to pay this off and generate your own ‘economic growth’. You’ve now got a greater disposable income, so naturally spend more. You then borrow another £40,000 and repeat the above.

Ed Balls believes that tightening your belt when you owe £10,000 is infinitely worse than when you owe £40,000 and are more inclined to spend more.

Real economic growth would take place through paying off the £10,000 and developing a greater disposable income (i.e. Increase the tax threshold to £10,000) in reducing your debt repayments to £0.

That is what the Coalition Government seeks to achieve, and I support them.

Has Ed Balls learnt nothing?

(This is an open response to Cllr Reggie Jones, a Labour Councillor for Blacon in Chester)

Oh what a delight it must be to live in Labour Land, where the Government should interfere, spy on, and be treated to jubilation and praise by its ever thankful population.

Or so Cllr Reggie Jones would have you believe.

Allow me to go through his latest claims one-by-one:

1) Low income households will lose the most out of the budget.

£2.13 per week. I’m not disputing that for some it can represent difficult decisions, but this is the same Labour Party who scoffed at the £2.83 per week marriage allowance in the Conservative manifesto. If £2.83 is an insult, then in Labour Land £2.13 must be nothing? Moving on to…

1a) Using the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) report as a critique of the Coalition’s budget.

Labour criticised the IFS report in their April budget, saying it couldn’t factor everything in. In Labour Land they are right, everyone else is wrong and there’s no room for disagreement.

2) Claiming that David Cameron is stepping away from free bus travel, television licences, and winter fuel payments.

Bus travel is being increased to 65 for all – like the pension age for all. Similarly winter fuel payments, and there’s no change to the TV licence being free for over 75′s. I’m afraid Cllr Reggie Jones is scaremongering. Scaremongering is rife in Labour Land, what with Labour sending out targeted cancer leaflets saying people would die if they voted Conservative.

3) The Coalition is abandoning those in need with fixed term social housing.

Social housing should be in place for those who need it most. Is Cllr Reggie Jones suggesting that those reliant on benefits should play second fiddle to a couple who have, through their own success, worked their way up the ranks at work and earn over £60,000 a year? That’s what the Coalition’s policy is to prevent – along with a married couple having a 4 bedroomed house whilst a family of 5 squeeze into a two bed. In Labour Land this is fine, as each bedroom is the size of a small bungalow.

Reality bites, and it would do the Labour Party a great deal of benefit to wise up to the fact that people don’t live in cloud cuckoo land, they live in reality. A debt-ridden reality where people are grown up enough to understand and accept the difficult truth. Britain has no money left (don’t take my word for it, the former Labour Treasury Minister Liam Byrne MP said it!).

The state is a safety net – not a wheelchair. The nanny state is dead – long live freedom and society.

On July 9th 2009, the Labour Department of Health planned the following:

Subject to a consultation launched on 9 July 2009 by Ofcom, a number of strategic health authority areas will pilot the use of 111 from spring 2010, with the intention of extending coverage to all of England if the pilots are successful. The Scottish Government has said it may follow suit, depending on the English pilots.

The service will not replace 999 for emergencies, but in the long term it is set to become the gateway to the NHS Direct nurse led phone service. For the time being NHS Direct will continue with its own telephone number, 0845 4647.

The move to a three figure number for NHS Direct was suggested in 2007 in the DoH’s Our NHS, Our Future report, and by the consumer organisation Which? In 2006. The latter’s research suggested that three quarters of people in England did not know the NHS Direct number.

Ofcom’s consultation notes that the memorability of the 999 emergency number, also available through the European-wide number 112, “often results in consumers calling 999/112 or going to accident and emergency departments, which may be unnecessary, inappropriate and inefficient”. It says emergency call volumes increased annually by an average of 6.5% between 1997-8 and 2006-7.

“Patients have told us that they need clear, easy advice on how to find healthcare when they don’t need to go to A&E and we have asked Ofcom to consult on making a new national 111 number available for them,” said health minister Mike O’Brien.

“The NHS already provides a range of urgent care services. The memorable 111 number will support these services and provide more choice for patients to find the care they need. This will be particularly useful outside of GP surgery hours and for people who are away from home.”

The department estimates that an England-wide 111 service could receive 14.4m to 30m calls annually, combining the volume of calls to NHS Direct and GP out of hours services.

The Conservative – Lib Dem Coalition has proposed the same (and plans to put it into action). Labour now say:

The plan has provoked an angry reaction from Labour, with shadow health secretary Andy Burnham using it as evidence of what he claims is the government’s intention to “dismantle” the NHS.

He said: “The health secretary’s statement will stun people across the NHS.

“It is yet more evidence that Andrew Lansley is on a vindictive mission to break up the NHS, ruthlessly dismantling services before alternatives are in place.”

Mr Burnham told the BBC that the government had shown “arrogance” and acted in a “cavalier” way by choosing to scrap NHS Direct without consulting the public.

He said the service saved the NHS £200m a year and played a key role in taking pressure off the health service.

He said: “It’s been a proven success for a decade and simply to scrap it is no way to run the NHS.”

Andy Burnham became the Secretary of State for Health on 5 June 2009.

UPDATE:

On December 19th 2009 The Labour Government announced plans so that:

Trained call takers will be able to give medical advice over the phone, direct more serious cases to the ambulance service and give details of the nearest walk-in centre or health centre for less urgent problems.

Ed Balls says that as a result of the IFS’ report into the emergency budget that:

“The government’s ideological assault on our welfare state and public services is not simply economic vandalism, I fear it will damage the very fabric of our society too.”

Right, so Labour don’t ideologically believe in spending more and taxing more, like, you know, the abolition of the 10p tax rate?

Getting people dependent on the state, rather than cutting taxes so that they can have more responsibility and control over their own life? Yes, they did that too.

Also, Labour attacked the Conservatives for having the audacity to offer £2.83 per week as tax relief for married couples, calling it an insult. They have also attacked the Coalition for taking a maximum of £2.13 per week away from families.

As for damaging the fabric of our society, why, under 13 years of a ‘progressive’ party, did the gap between rich and poor widen – and by so much?

Labour vandalised the economy – The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are fixing it.

Greater Election analysis later, but how’s this taster from what may be coming out of a ranting Gordon Brown’s mouth right now…

“What we need now is a clear message to the people of this country. This message must be read in every newspaper, heard on every radio, seen on every television…. I want this country to realise that we stand on the edge of oblivion; I want every man, woman and child to understand how close we are to chaos; I want everyone to remember WHY THEY NEED US!”

(above could also be from V fo Vendetta – same applies!)

Substance vs Style… We’ve all heard it, generally from Gordon Brown over the last few years, but it’s been ramped up to 11 these last few weeks.

But what does it mean?

Purely because Gordon Brown has been the King Levy of the Charge (Possible post for him if he’s not PM on Friday?!), let’s look at what he’s been upto: Elvis impersonator at a Labour ‘relaunch’ – yes, you can relaunch your party/manifesto one week into an election campaign. No, it’s not an excuse for more press and less interaction with non-Labourites, it’s a way that the people can see I’m a serious candidate for serious times. Whilst having ‘Wonder of You’ blared into my ear. Nice. Next up, Peppa Pig! Only she wasn’t. She scarpered. Mrs Duffy. Smiling and agreeing with her, then back turned and POW! – Gordon, you know the microphone that you requested Sky News clip on to you, so we could hear you interact with ‘real people’? It’s still on…

If you claim to be the candidate of substance over style, purely being style-less isn’t enough to get you on to this table. You need to go out there, speak to people, yes, even Tories, and explain why you are the right man for the job. Think about it, you see Cameron & Clegg attending local events – yes, there’s supporters there, but Cameron’s been egged & heckled and come out of it smelling a little eggy, but looking both statesmanlike and displaying a sense of humour; similarly Nick Clegg – he was taken on by a student this week, dealt with her (ish) and was able to crack a joke at the end of it. I’m not saying we want Michael McIntyre as Prime Minister, but being able to be personable, deal with the rough outside of Parliament, and generally having a slight likeability factor is what we want – not Elvis (despite my being a fan) and Peppa Pig (despite my not being a fan). Gordon’s problem is that he doesn’t want life outside his family and Parliament/the role of PM. He doesn’t want to interact with people he doesn’t know; he doesn’t feel comfortable doing it, but at the same time doesn’t have the courage to stand up to Mandelson et al and say:

“No. I want to campaign on my policies, that is who I am, that is what I do best. No media managing, no PR gurus, no spin doctors, nothing. Just me in a suit, at an event where the world and his dog are invited to come.”

It’ll never happen, and that is the reason he’s plummeted in the polls – coupled with the fact that the Labour Party screams dictatorship, wanting to tell us how to think, how to live, how to act – and now plans on reading our mail, but if people want that, good luck to them.

As far as the Liberal Democrats go, they say they’re the only real force for change. That’s fine, but where in your manifesto is this radical change? £10k income tax level, whilst not as high as I’d like, is progress from the current state of affairs. Similarly, Proportional Representation – whilst I disagree with it, I do accept the Single Transferable Vote as an alternative to First Past The Post. And that’s it. Removing Trident, joining the Euro, amnesty for all – none of these are especially radical in the way we do things in the UK – indeed, “It’s a healthy thing now & then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.” THAT is where the Conservatives are offering change – particularly in the Education System.

As someone who, until recently was a trainee teacher, I was able to see where the need for change can come from – I’ve been lucky enough to have a placement at a fantastic comprehensive school, just outside of Chester, where the staff and pupils seem to enjoy coming in. That said, I’m also aware that several groups within the realms of teaching, hate the prospect of a Conservative victory in the General Election because they will shake things up. Look back at the quote I wrote above – that was from Bertrand Russell, a 20th Century Socialist. We should ask questions of the way we do things; just because we’ve always done them doesn’t make them right, appropriate for right now, and allows us to leave them be whilst the ‘experts’ take over. Rubbish! The Thatcher Governments from 83-90 were radical – they shook up Britain, and dragged us kicking and screaming to a point where we were ready for the 21st Century. The Education system, the Health service, the amount of power Local Government has, the amount of people dependent on the public sector for jobs – all of this needs change, one way or another.

The stock argument I hear about the freedom to set up schools is that the children who attend won’t receive proper teaching. The fact you’ll still need to be a qualified teacher evidently carries little weight… The NHS – whilst the Conservatives have promised to increase spending on it year on year, I do hope this is on single rooms, cleanliness & drug advancement – not on ridiculous layers of bureaucracy. Having seen my mum work in the NHS all her life, and towards her retirement have three different bosses, all of whom wanted a say in exactly what she was doing, none of whom wanting to listen to her perspective from actually doing the job, I’m quite confident that the NHS is as bloated as can be. Indeed, across North Wales, until last year there were three Primary Care Trusts; they then merged to form the ‘Betsi Cadwaladr Trust’. Normally mergers result in efficiencies, savings across the board and general improvements in the way things work. How many less people does one NHS trust employ than three? 32. In 2009 the three Trusts employed 16,869 people. In 2010 they employ 16,837. Don’t be too surprised, this is the same NHS where Doctors can go on holiday (paid leave) and work as a locum (paid at above usual salary rate) in a different hospital being paid twice at the same time. This is the sort of practice that a change of Government needs to bring to the table; a change in Government that gives Local Authorities the power to do the things that they believe benefit their communities; who knows best, residents or Whitehall?

The reason so few vote in Local Elections (approx. 35% in the 2008 CWaC election), is that they don’t see/know what difference a change in leadership makes. Often changes in local government simply reflect the national mood, operating as ‘mid-term’ elections on the National Government. If this wasn’t the case, why are there so few non-Conservative controlled Councils in England now compared to elections in the mid-90s? Giving local authorities greater autonomy from Whitehall, allowing them to set Business Rates, a Local Sales Tax (replacing VAT) etc will empower local communities more – they will have a greater choice at local elections, allowing them to realise that their vote really can change things for the area in which they live.

Finally, the public sector is not the ‘Economy’. The private sector is. Gordon Brown going around, telling anyone who’ll listen that the Tories are evil and will take £6bn out of the economy. He’s wrong. The Tories will be pumping £6bn into the economy. (Personally, I’d rather there were more cuts than the initial £6bn outlined thus far, but that’s my libertarian streak shining through…) We have become too reliant on the public sector – for services, money and jobs. Think about tax credits – we have to fill in half a dozen forms, wait a few months, then told actually, sorry, you’re not entitled to anything. Why not, as the Lib Dems have started to, talk about simply increasing the band of tax? I’ve mentioned before about doing away with it, but whilst the Government’s in debt, that’s not too realistic – £15,000 tax free for everyone. No need to be reliant on tax credits. With regards services, let the private/third sector have a greater say – let them pitch tenders to authorities to offer the services that we currently ‘expect’ our Councils to fill. If needs be, allow charges to be installed – should everyone pay tax so that some people might want to do/attend something? No. If you reduce Council Tax, people will have more money to spend; if they then want to attend something, they can spend their money on it. Jobs. Some parts of Britain are 2/3rds publicly employed. Why are private sector companies not moving there? As outlined, giving Councils the say over Business Rates and Local Sales Taxes, amongst others, would encourage competition – CWaC would rather, for example, Bank of America was based here rather than 6 miles down the road in Wrexham; as such, in the pre-unitary authority days, the Councils needed to pitch themselves to BoA.

I’m not saying privatise local authorities – far from it. What I am saying is that the public sector needs to be run like a business; every time a job becomes available, don’t rush to fill it. Ask the following question: “Do we really need to fill that position?” That is where cuts can be found without having to look for them. It’s not about firing people, or making thousands redundant; it’s about removing the reliance on the State that 13 years of Labour Government have sought to instil in each and every one of us. That is why when people talk about substance vs. style, Labour are the party of style; they are the party trying to win an election on fear, scaremongering, lies and reliance. THEY are the party that wants to keep everything the same for another 5 years. Substance is when you have party policies, like overhauling the education system, like increasing the tax band, willing to go out on a limb and say “Look, this is what we plan to do. It’s different, it’s new, but we believe it will work.” I’m not saying vote for change for change’s sake. I’m saying vote for something different. Let’s hang a question mark on the things we have long taken for granted.

Let’s change our Country – for the better.

Firstly, I think this post on ConservativeHome sums part of the mood up quite well:

Through an unprecedented expansion of surveillance and data collection, this Labour government has relentlessly invaded the privacy of the British people over the last thirteen years. Their rationale: if you’ve nothing to hide,you’ve nothing to fear.

What a splendid irony that the remarks Gordon Brown thought he was making in private have now sealed his fate.

Secondly, I’m not going to lay in to Brown – what I am going to say is this: Saying something stupid/wrong is something most politicians will do at some point. The challenge is not to let it define you.

“…words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who’s to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you’re looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn’t be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now [Prime Minister, Gordon Brown] He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent… My hope [is] to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words, they are perspectives. So if you’ve seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you then I would suggest you allow the [6th May] to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you…” to not vote Labour on Thursday, 6th May 2010.

Thanks to Owen Meredith for the image