The state we're in! - Fuel, Pasties and Grannies

Where to start?

• Granny Tax?
• Fuel?
• Pasties?
• The Economy?

How about Fuel?  There is a potential strike by tanker drivers - why? - It is hard to find out the cause.  BBC Newsnight interviewed a driver who spoke of not being able to spend much time with his family, except at weekends (not sure how that differs for most of us!) and then there was some muttering about health and safety and training.  The latter seems to be the key, as far as I can ascertain.  The issue seems to be that transport companies are outsourcing deliveries and the claim is that these drivers are less well trained.  My guess is that they are also likely to not be members of the Labour-party supporting Unite union but it would be mischievous to suggest that this has any connection!

Don't mis-understand me.  I think that the government has very ineptly handled the whole issue.  The advice from Francis Maude, about storing fuel at home, was plain silly and potentially dangerous and it's retraction was to tardy.  The comments about topping-up were ill-judged and clearly unnecessary.

However, look to yourself and your neighbors - how many of us rushed sheep (or is it lemming) like to put fuel into a car?  Queuing to do so and using more fuel in the process.  I would suggest that when hysteria breaks out - all are culpable.

The incident with the woman who decanted a fuel can, inside a house, where naked flames were present, is horrific but what would we be saying, about the incident, if there had been no suggestion from the government?  I wonder if we might be questioning the common sense of the woman?  


Granny Tax?  Unless I am mistaken, the proposal is to not index-link  tax free allowances for OAPs.  Hardly a tax!  This will over time, put pensioner earnings on a par with those of everyone else, as regards taxation.  Exactly what is wrong with that?  If the Tories were really anti-OAP, they would have means-tested benefits like free bus passes and the winter-fuel allowance - it can't be right that wealthy pensioners receive these universal benefits, when they clearly don't need them!

Pasties?  Give me strength!  All this talk about ambient temperature is plain rubbish.  Tax them, level the playing field for other hot food providers and move on!

Reminder - The UK has troops on active service in Afghanistan and we have recently lost personnel to terrorist activity.  This is a newsworthy story - not fuel, pasties or grannies!  You won't see Ed Miliband and his  Labour fools having photo-ops at Brize Norton!  They are too busy scoring silly and cheap political points at Greggs!

Everything else - We still have a sick economy and growth is fragile.  I personally think that the change in Corporation Tax will have better than predicted medium to long term benefits.  The accelerated increase in personal tax allowances is very welcome and should provide some impetus (kudos to the Lib-Dems!).

My view is that the economy and its recovery should be the absolute key focus of the government.  For those government departments not in the front line (other than Treasury) then the focus must be on getting out of the way of economic growth.

• Cut Red Tape - all departments to review legislation, such as HS&E and all legislation to be costed.  Do this within a given (short) time frame - 3 months - it's that urgent!  Then repeal all that which has no net positive benefit and implement as a single, very short act of Parliament, within 12 months.
• Close Quangos (a real bonfire not a flash in the pan).  I have a list of suggestions!
• Abandon the foolish Climate Change policies which are hurting the UK consumer for no real environmental benefit (I would suggest that the contrary is true, including the very real damage to the physical environment)   
• End the Minimum Wage legislation requirements for employees under the age of 21 and then apply a sliding scale, up towards the current level, for those aged 21 to 25.  
• Escalate the repatriation of our armed services personnel from Afghanistan - complete by the end of the year.
• Vigorously oppose all additional spending by the EU Commission and scrutinize existing spend.
• Don't get distracted with un-required legislation for homosexual 'marriage' or with so called reform of the House of Lords.  These are 'navel gazing' exercises which will add nought to the economic recovery nor to making the UK a better society. 
• Do proceed with implementation of the Welfare and Health reforms.

Reminder again     We still have troops on active service and our economy is very sick.  These MUST be our priorities.

On Being a Conservative

What does it mean to be a Conservative in today's UK?  Does the Conservative Party represent those views?

It seems to me that the Conservative Party is becoming ever more divorced from its principles and supporters as it seems to see being in power as its raison d'etre rather than delivering traditional Conservative policies and rolling back the frontiers of the state.

Taxes
As we run up to the budget, all the talk is about the 50% tax rate or a mansion tax.  Tax cuts?  No thanks we will just give with one hand and take with the other.  When exactly did it become Conservative policy that taxes are to be levied as a right by government and then spent how government sees fit?

Pensions
Part of the budget discussions point to removing tax relief on higher level pension contributions.  So, we tax people highly and then if the individual can afford to put money away for their retirement (probably because the individual  sees that the current model is unsustainable) we penalize them. 

The nettle of means-testing benefits isn't being grasped.  It used to be the case that 'means test' was a shaming phrase.  That was in the days when taxpayer-funded and government-donated support was low, as was welfare dependency. Now Conservatives can introduce the means testing of benefits and avoid the usual opprobrium.  Winter Fuel allowance and Free Bus passes - means test them.  People contributed to their pensions via NI Contributions.  Fair enough!  These additional benefits should be to relieve hardship not bolster income.  But don't expect the Conservative leadership to introduce means-testing.

Defence
We find ourselves embroiled in Afghanistan supporting a corrupt regime that doesn't seem to show any gratitude for us being there (though they are happy to take our aid!) and on a mission that was essentially completed almost ten years ago.  The mission, lest we forget was to get rid of the Taliban government (Done) and chase Al Qaeda from Afghanistan (Done). So why are we there spending money on the defence of that country while endangering our Service personnel and having inadequate funds for the defence of our own people?

Europe
In opposition, many were led to believe we would see a more robust defence of the UK's interests in Europe.  Action would be taken on the European Court for Human Rights.  Bold words have been found to come from a 'paper tiger'.  The UK continues to appear (and indeed act) powerless in front of the EU machine.  Only by the grace of Labour keeping us out of the Euro, are we not now being controlled by technocrats appointed by Germany.

Local Authorities
The Conservatives do not run all - Those they do, should immediately cease all funding of so called 'pilgrims' - Union employees that are paid for by the local tax payers to do union work instead of the work for which they were employed.   The same applies to all of those 'pilgrims' in the central government sector.  The cost runs into tens of millions of pounds.  How can this be allowed, by Conservatives?

Marriage
I have written earlier, on this blog, about changing the status of marriage, so that it includes the civil union between  homosexuals.  However, in spite of promises made, prior to the 2010 election, to recognize marriage in the tax code, nothing has happened.  So the party that promotes itself as being for the family continues to penalize married couples over cohabiting couples.  This in spite of all evidence confirming that children raised within a 'normal' married family achieve better at school, commit less crime etc., etc..

Union
The Conservatives are the party of the UNion.  Yet they are allowing the Scottish Nationalist Party to make all the running as regards the question of Scottish Independence.  This when they both know that a referendum for such independence is one that can only be legal if it is sanctioned and carried out under the auspices of the UK government.  The defence of the Union is feeble and the lies and half-truths and economic claptrap that emanates from Holyrood is left unchallenged.  One supposed upshot of Scottish independence is said to be that  Labour will lose a very significant part of it's Westminster presence.  That is something to be wished for but only if the Conservatives then follow Conservative policies.

Energy and The Environment
The Conservatives have continued with the economic and environmental madness espoused by Labour and also their Lib-Dem Coalition partners and the European Green fanatics.  They continue with a policy to meet a threat - Global Warming - which real science - as opposed to the fakers and falsifying scientists - know is simply untrue.  More and more we are hearing of scientists exposing the lies (they don't do half-truths!) put out by the Climate Change fanatics.  However, the Conservatives continue with these flawed 'green' policies.  They enforce Wind power on communities, subsidize it to the hilt (from rampantly increasing energy bills) and totally ignore the fact that it is inefficient (at absolute very best  each turbine can generate a maximum of 30% of its stated capacity!) and above all else, has to be backed-up with other generating capacity (the wind doesn't blow all the time!)


Welfare Reform
At the first sign of opposition, from the Socialist Workers Party, this Conservative led Coalition, caves in and changes the rules on what was, in reality, never as draconian a policy as it was said to be (the SWP are not known for letting facts get in the way of an anti-capitalist rant).  The so called Welfare Cap is still way, way too high.  How can it incentivize people to get a job when the job they can get is paying less than the cap?  East Europeans will take these lower paying jobs because in their own country, they have no cap and no real safety net - so no work = no life of relative luxury on the dole!

Summary
The only area where this supposedly Conservative-led Coalition is following Conservative policies is in Education.   Here they are freeing schools from the bindings of out-dated and Left-wing controlled PC lobbies.

Elsewhere, I see a Conservative Government whose sole question, since 2010 seems to be 'How can we get re-elected in 2015?  All policies and actions lead to that goal.  The Conservatives have to be about more than just that!!

And, Conservatives don't really have a choice. 

• If you are an employee of the state you can vote Labour, in the sure and certain knowledge that they will use someone else's money to fund your existence.  
• Same for those on welfare.  

But Conservatives? 

Conservative businessmen? -  Continuing to drown in 'Red Tape' and ever higher tax demands.  Conservative private sector employees?- Higher taxes, energy bills, less service and an ever bleaker economic future (whether or not we come under the boot of the German led Europeans)

Please don't suggest UKIP - they are a one-trick pony.  The BNP likewise and their policies are strongly socialist once you get beyond their abhorrent views on immigration.

Someone please tell me that at some point, the Conservative Party will start to act in a manner, and follow policies, that make their supporters grateful that they voted for them.   I don't want to have to wait until 2016!

Changes to Marriage - more pandering

The government is about to issue a consultation paper on proposed changes to the legal definition of marriage so as to open the institution of marriage to same-sex partnerships.

Why?
Who wants this?
Who among the population of the UK, is clamoring for this?
Why is the government pushing this unnecessary legislation at a time when their major focus should be on economic issues?

In 2004 the Labour Government brought into law, the concept of Civil Partnerships.  We were told at this time, that it was only right that those homosexual couples that wanted to, should be able to become legally joined and could then share the same legal rights as were enjoyed by married heterosexual couples.  One of the main arguments put forward surrounded the inequality that was seen for homosexual couples where, when one died, the surviving partner, could not inherit in the same manner as a surviving partner from a civil marriage.

This Civil Partnership act changed that and gave equal rights to those homosexuals that made that legal commitment to each other.  So why is further change required?

The danger with the current proposals, apart from them causing a distraction from the major issues facing this country (maybe that is the point?), is that government is entering into an arena that brings it into direct conflict with religious organizations and with the fundamental nature of what marriage is and the 'right' of politicians to re-define marriage.

I am  not talking about civil marriage.  That is recognized by all Christian churches and (excuse my ignorance if I am wrong,) by all other religious/faith  organizations.  I am talking about enshrining in UK law, the concept that marriage is no longer the sole preserve of the union between a man and a woman.  In the recent letter from the Catholic Bishops Conference, marriage is described as an institution that is at the foundation of our society and married couples as the source and guardians of the next generation. 

So who is pushing for this legislation?  The homosexual 'community' is reckoned to be less than 6% of the UK population.   If, for a moment we made the assumption that all  of this 'community' were in favour of so called 'gay' marriage, that would still represent a very small minority.

If legislation was to be about pandering to 'the people' - how about listening to the widely held views on the UK withdrawal from the EU?  What about pandering to the Capital Punishment lobby.  I would suspect that a significantly greater portion of the population would support such legislation, IF THEY WERE ASKED!

But they won't be asked.  And when MPs come to vote on the issue they will be ever-mindful of the media hate campaign that will be ranged against all opponents of this legislation.  MPs and commentators, who oppose the legislation (including this blogger) will be called homophobic and painted as reactionary and such.

I have mentioned earlier, why is this an issue that is being addressed (at all) and why now?  The focus of this government should be to promote economic growth, extricate the country from the mire of debt, into which we are sinking and, in my view, develop a way of government that is far less intrusive in the lives of the people of the UK.

I urge you to consider the dangers posed by this legislation and ask you to sign the petition at
www.C4M.org.uk

50% Tax, Mansion Tax - No to both!

As we run up to the UK Budget, we are hearing some of the horse trading that the Lib-Dem part of the Coalition are trying to push.

The Lib-Dems are suggesting that the 'price' for their support in removing the 50% tax rate, on salaries over £150K, would be the introduction of a so-called Mansion Tax of 1% on houses valued at more than £2 million.

So, they want to replace a tax that raises far less than was projected, with another tax that, while playing to the current public clamour for higher taxes for the rich, will also not likely raise any meaningful levels of income and will impoverish those people, mainly in the South East, who are asset rich but income poor - those that, because of property price inflation have seen the value of their houses increase but who do not necessarily have an income which would support such a house price nor would allow them to pay the tax!

Think about this a little further.  These houses have largely been purchased out of taxed income - yes some will have been inherited, but the majority will be the fruits of the labour of their owners.

With their push for this Mansion Tax, the Lib Dems clearly show their Socialist colours. 

• Tax people highly, when they are earning.
• Tax people on what they spend their after tax money on
• Tax people on what those possessions that they purchased, with after tax money, when they die.

In short, Tax, Tax, Tax 

I may have missed a step in this process, if I did, you can be sure that the Lib Dems and their Socialist fellow-travelers in the Labour Party, will want it taxed.  As you would expect, Labour backs the Mansion Tax, so long as the money raised is spent on their pet projects, which are otherwise unaffordable.

I call on true Conservatives to do three things.

• Recognize that the Conservatives are the majority party in the Coalition and act accordingly - don't let the tail, wag the dog!
• Have the courage to remove the 50% rate and live with the political fall-out - tell the truth about how it is simply a fig-leaf to make politicians feel good and really is counter-productive as a revenue raising tool.
• Consider what being a Conservative means and understand that it isn't just about being in power at all costs, it is about implementing Conservative policies while in power!

Please pass this on to others.  Pandering isn't an attractive trait.

EU and Russia Democracy

Russia is in the process of electing a President. 

There are many in Europe and the EU that question the poll and suggest that this is rigged and the result is a foregone conclusion.

I don't have enough information to comment on the fairness of voting in Russia.

I will observe though, that Herman von Rompuy, was, on Friday, elected as President of the European Council, representing 730 million Europeans, by the 27 leaders of the EU countries!  No public vote, no consultation, the proximity to democracy was like that of one of those meteors that is picked up in deep space and is said to be brushing the edges of the Milky Way!

So, Europeans, before we get on a high horse about Russia's democratic deficit, we should look to our selves, first!!

Response to Scotland Consultation Exercise

Below you will find the response I have sent to the UK Government's Scotland Office in answer to their public consultation exercise on Scotland's constitutional future.

The e-mail address is:    reply@scotlandoffice.gsi.gov.uk


Feel free to cut and paste any parts of the below response.

I strongly encourage you to make a response, whether like me, you are a defender of the Union, or you wish to see Scottish independence.  Get your voice heard.


 
In response to the consultation exercise conducted by the Scotland Office of the UK Government, I offer the following:

Date of Referendum
I believe that the referendum should be held at the earliest possible opportunity.  Given that the referendum on the devolution of powers to the Scottish Parliament was started by the UK Government, following the election of Labour in May 1997 and was concluded by September 1997 with the questions framed, organization and administration established and functioning and, the count made and declared.   We have missed the opportunity to conduct the referendum alongside local elections in May but I believe this could be conducted and completed by end of October 2012.  In order to promote the fullest possible participation, I suggest that the polling day be a national holiday in Scotland.

The Question
This can only require a simple Yes or No response.  Nationalist parties in Scotland posit that there is such a clamour for independence for Scotland, from the United Kingdom and as such clarity is called for. 

• Do you want the Scottish Parliament to enter into negotiations with the government of the United Kingdom, to lead to Scotland seceding from the United Kingdom  and conclude an equitable distribution of assets and liabilities, to effect the same?

The Electorate
Use the same criteria as apply in all Local Authority, Scottish, General and European elections, within the UK and within Scotland.  That is, those on the latest electoral register within Scottish constituencies.  Explicitly, the franchise not to be extended to those not currently qualified nor to exclude any persons on the basis of their country of birth.

Authority and Administration
The authority to conduct any referendum on independence, clearly rest with the UK Parliament.  It follows that this would also apply to the question to be asked and the 'terms and conditions', including the timing of such a referendum.   As a consideration to the Scottish Parliament, I suggest that a short parliamentary bill be proposed and passed  that devolves this power, for a single instance, to the Scottish parliament for the Referendum to be held under the administrative auspices of the Electoral Commission.

The Question and Devo-Max
As stated earlier, my view is that the position to be put before the electorate of Scotland should be a simple Yes or No question.  The issues surrounding so called 'Devo-Max', which include a suggestion to significantly increase the powers of the Scottish Parliament, create an impact on the whole of the United Kingdom and as such, can only be addressed through the forum of the UK-wide electorate.

I submit the foregoing on the basis that my views are not confidential and should the Scotland Office wish to publish them, then they are free to do so.

Privatising the English police

Expect the usual clap-trap from the Left and anti-business lobby to the proposals that are being tendered and implemented surrounding the 'privatization' of police services in some English forces.

Consider though

Why does the person on the front desk (or reception, if you will) need to be a police officer?  Hospitals manage without a doctor or nurse in A&E.

Why does the person answering the 999 calls have to be a police officer?  I don't suggest that this is outsourced to India (though the English would likely be better spoken!) but we have call centres in the UK!

I hear tales that some police stations have a business improvement department.  I kid you not.

We need police to do the policing not secretarial and administrative tasks.

Euro Fraud and Danger - Germans and Dutch beware!

The European Central Bank (honestly, that's what they arrogantly call it!) is flooding the wholesale money market with loans at low rates.  So much so that, given the favourable rates, British banks have waded in and are having a slice of the pie.  The British banks seem to be using these funds to prop-up their subsidiaries in the troubled Southern European economies.

This money is, in some ways, akin to the Quantitative Easing practised by the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve.

In some ways.  One key way in which it isn't the same is that the people whose pockets and wallets stand behind this largesse, are not being told about it.  When does financial sleight of hand become fraud?  You decide!

National Central Banks in the EuroZone  countries ultimately provide the funding for the ECB.  There is no way that the Eurocrats have the courage to directly ask the governments of Germany, Netherlands Finland etc., to fund this folly.  So they are doing it by the back-door.  They are creating a situation where the ECB, will at some point, have to go to those national governments for funding and the hope is that the national governments will conclude that they have no choice, will dress this up as unrelated to the actual Eurozone crisis and will pay-up.  Good news is that the citizens of those countries won't be asked to vote on the process - just to pay up!

Most of these ECB loans are being used to buy-up government bonds from the failing economies of Southern Europe.  In doing so, the cost of this government paper comes down - because, it is suddenly so popular!  However, in order to get the loans, the European banks must lodge, as collateral their highest quality assets.  In doing so, they weaken their own balance sheets and make the likelihood of a need for a government bailout, shortly down the road,  that much more probable.  Spanish and Italian banks are heavily tied into their own country's fate but German and particularly French banks also have heavy exposure here.

 Rumour has it that there is a proposal doing the rounds of the European governments to change the alphabet.  The proposal is to drop the letter D.  The proposers suggest that without this letter we wouldn't have a deficit, there would be no debt, the actual depression in Southern Europe wouldn't exist and that pesky old Greek word democracy, wouldn't be bothering us (not that it does too much, anyway!!) 

By the way, other than giving us the word democracy, what have the Greeks done for us (Life of Brian followers, only please!).

Seems that, not for the first time, the Germans are proving to be a barrier to this necessary reform on the pathway to a federal European utopia.  Seems that a country that is less than 200 years old, has grown accustomed and has invested a lot of its national prestige in being called Deutschland!  Hopefully a way can be found to eliminate the letter D without the German parliament or Constitutional Court being called into the discussion.  The problem with the Dutch is easily solved, we just call them Hollanders.  The Danes can be Vikings.