Time for the Tories and Lib Dems to be bold

I am writing from outside the UK and distance is maybe changing (improving, I think) my perspective.

It currently seems a 'given' that the Lib Dems will receive a hammering at the next General Election.  Much of this will be due to their perceived 'betrayal' over tuition fees.  That the support of tuition fees was an absolute requirement, given the awful state of the UK finances, at the time of the change of government, will count for little with an electorate, that like others in Europe, prefers to think that 'the situation can't really be that bad, can it?'

The Tories too are suffering a leakage of support -not on a Lib Dem scale - but worryingly enough, all the same. 

So what to do?

I would suggest that now is the time for boldness!  Some suggestions follow which I believe would, if presented as a Coalition policy and loudly supported by both parts of the Coalition,  help both the Tories and the Lib Dems.

Welfare Reform
Working people (there are still a few of us!) look at the £26,000 cap and still see that this is WAY too high.  Maybe the level was set by Westminster MPs who see that in London that isn't such a large amount, but on Merseyside, Tyneside, Manchester and Birmingham, such a cap is still seen as high and as offering no incentive to go  out and get a job. 

The Average wage is £26,000.  On this tax and National Insurance would be assessed, so the 'Welfare crackdown' or as Labour puts it, 'the attack on the poorest members of society' still leaves some folks better-off out of work, than in it.

Two further reforms:
Restrict all benefit eligibility to those legally resident in the UK for the two years preceding a claim.  If that means changing the law or abandoning the European Courts, then do it.  Hundreds of thousands of Southern Europeans heading towards soft-touch UK, should concentrate the minds of our politicians (should do, but probably won't as they are in such thrall to Brussels and Strasbourg!).

Cut benefit for people that have refused to accept three jobs.  They get 2 job interviews and can turn those down, if they turn down the third, their benefit is cut by 25%.  Refuse the next one, that's a further 25% cut.  Oh, and if they get sacked from the job they take, in the first three months, same rule applies.  And benefit cut means ALL benefits - unemployment, housing, council tax etc..

Growth

On its own, Welfare Reform is politically problematic.  Though if we don't do something to be bring down public expenditure, we might end up having this forced on us by the IMF!!  The way though to make it more acceptable is if there is a strategy for growth.  Making statements such as 'get a job you lazy scrounger' might allow an over-taxed worker some release of frustration but if there isn't a job to go to!?

I have yet to read any accounts of how job and economic growth is to come, without the commentators looking for this to be built from the ground-up at small and medium sized enterprises.  Tesco or Asda hiring on an extra 5,000 workers (many of whom will be part-time) grabs the headlines, but it is the 1 or 2 hired at the local plumbers, or engineering firm or garage, which, when multiplied across the length and breadth of the country, that will get the economy growing.

So........

Government (Local and National), in the form of excessive regulation needs to get off of the backs of these business.  They (companies less than 100 employees) should be exempted from Working Time directives, exempted from unfair dismissal legislation and enjoy a far, far lighter Health, Safety and Environment regime than that applied to the larger companies.  These bigger companies can afford, Equality Officers, Environmental Impact and Risk Assessment Officers, Green Business Stewards and such.  In many of these small companies these bureaucratic roles end-up being filled by the owner or spouse and just take them away for growing their business - that is the business growth that will lead to hiring more employees!

Local Government should exempt local employers that employ less than 100 people from Business Rates or if that is to onerous, should give a discount for each new employee hired.  Hire one new employee, 10% off of your Business Tax, hire 5 employees, 50% off etc. 

The poor working stiff still makes up the majority.  These are the folks that paying their high income taxes and National Insurance and VAT and ever higher fuel charges/Green Taxes these  latter to wastefully fund an extravagant and totally unnecessary policy on Climate Change (remember it used to be called Global Warming, until the 'science' was found to have been doctored?). 

My view is that people understand that under Labour, things got way out of hand.  We understand that cuts need to be made and those working in the public sector need to suffer a greater sacrifice as they benefited most from Labour's tax-payer funded largesse.

We see through Labour's opportunistic politicking at a time when all developed economies are suffering but some see that at least Labour seem to have a policy.  It is the same old flawed policy that they used to get us into the current mess, for which they have never said sorry, but at least it seems better than what we are getting!

Pass this on to your Tory and Lib Dem colleagues, it can only help them get re-elected!

Cash for Scrap - You were told!

I posted on this blog, back in January regarding the scrap metal industry.
 
 http://thismakesmemadyoutoo.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/cash-for-scrap-act-now.html

The thefts of metals continues to rise and this week we have seen that a plaque, commemorating the loss of two innocent young boys, in Warrington, to a murderous IRA bomb, has been stolen. 

Naturally this sparks outrage and that questioning  feeling of 'what have we become'? 

Sorry to report though, that the theft of this plaque is just the latest in a long line of such thefts.  Many memorials to Britain's war dead have been equally desecrated and robbed. 

I wrote in January, 

The UK government is proposing to require the scrap industry to have people to produce identification when selling scrap and to not pay them in cash.

Since then, I am not aware of any actual action being put in place.  Our politicians can find time to lob 'pastys' at each other, fret over Leveson  and pump yet more UK tax payer money to support the failed Euro project but do a simple thing that honours our heroes and allows us to remember them?  Sorry, no too busy!  So now, MPs, to their shame, cannot even be bothered to pay lip service!


Meantime the scrap industry continues to support illicit activity.

In January I said.

Legislation needs to be put in place, now.  Consultation and so on, isn't required, we know what needs to be done and cannot allow for further desecration of memorials or churches.

What is required before action is taken?  A train crash because someone has stolen copper from a signalling system?

If you agree, let your MP know.

The only change since January, is further thefts and sorrow for family members and yet more shame for Britain.

Remember, Britain still has armed services personnel on active duty in Afghanistan! 

Europe In or Out - Tory puzzle

In politics, timing, like luck, is very important.

I can't help thinking that Labour are about to pip the Tories to the post and announce that they will hold a referendum on membership of the EU, if they assume office after the next election.  They will probably say that they will campaign for continued membership etc. but, they will steal the thunder of the Conservatives and how many UKIP folks and votes will move across?

There is still time for the Conservatives to make a pledge but will they?  Or will, the Lib Dem tail continue to wag the Tory dog?

Just exactly what kind of hold do you think that the Lib Dems have, over the Tories?  All recent polls suggest that the Lib Dems are facing political oblivion, so does anyone believe they will rush to bring down the Coalition?  Come on, even though their 'policies' are stupid, doesn't mean that they are turkeys that would vote for an early Christmas.

I have asked before and will do so again - just what is it, that the Conservatives now stand for?  Could it be that the lack of a spine means that they can't stand for anything?

Greece and Spain - Opportunity or risk?

How do you feel about Greece maybe exiting the Euro?  Are you relaxed about the implications for the economy of the EU and maybe the World?

What about Spain?  While exit from the Euro may be a little further away (or did I speak too soon!!) broadly the same economic conditions prevail and, like Greece, can austerity piled upon austerity work here?

Note also how the spotlight has moved from Greece to Spain and Ireland and Portugal have, for the time being, been skipped over.  I think though that they will come back to haunt the Euro and EU, again.

I guess I am conflicted about the whole thing. 

Part of  me expects that the Euro must collapse under the weight of its inherent contradictions and I would look forward to that as it would, I believe, lead to a much required re-evaluation of the whole EU project and may, just may, give the people of Europe a say in what they want.  I do not believe that anyone who knows anything about Europe and the EU, can say that the current set-up has any democratic legitimacy.

On the other hand, I worry about what would be the knock-on consequences of a major default or banks collapsing, in Spain.  I think that Greece is essentially 'priced in' for the financial markets (even if the non-austerity parties eventually form a coalition).

Spain though is another and much bigger 'kettle of fish'.  The ripples from a banking sector collapse, in Spain will have much more impact and France will not be unaffected, by any means.  Latin America will also not escape unscathed, is my belief.

So what a choice -

Hope that people can accept that 'living within your means' (that is what austerity really means!) and will undertake the hardships to travel that journey

or

Hope that the weaknesses of the Euro project lead to its demise and a complete re-assessment of the EU - its purpose and its legislative reach and equally importantly, its lack of democratic accountability.

Any thoughts?

Give MPs more time off!

Or, more accurately, let them spend more time in their constituencies, attending to local issues.

Why?

Well, when MPs sit in Westminster that chatter and plot about this and that - which wouldn't be a problem but then the media play one off against another and create news that is only news in the Westminster bubble.  This febrile environment serves no real purpose but, as always, the taxpayer pays!

More worryingly though, when MPs are at Westminster, they want to debate and then pass laws.  Does anyone think we really need more laws?

During the 13 years of Labour mis-rule, they created over 3,000 new offences and who knows how many new laws.

The focus of the Coalition government shouldn't be ANY new laws unless they are to repeal the tangle of red tape that strangles business and removes personal responsibility from people.

The focus should be two-fold.

First, promoting economic growth - That might include removing barriers (see red tape above) or it might just mean, getting out of the way.

Second, implement the Welfare, Education and Health reforms that have been enacted.  Oh! and enforce those laws that are actually on the statute book!

That's it. 

After the next election, if growth has returned, maybe we can consider a return to having MPs sitting in the house - though having done without them there, for a while...............


The recent Queen's Speech could have been a whole lot shorter and better for it!.

The effect of the Public Sector strike in the UK

Consider this.
What impact did the strike, by some union members, on May 10, have on you?

The best that the unions can come up with, in terms of numbers of participants was 'in the hundreds of thousands'.  This out of a total of 5 million.  So most probably less than 10% of these people were actually motivated to withdraw their 'labour'.

Remember too that in many cases the support for strike action is often preceded by a very poorly responded too strike ballot, with participation typically around the 35% or less mark.  So when these union leaders claim 'the overwhelming support of their members' they usually mean something around 20% !!

So what impact did the strike have?  Even the biased BBC had difficulty in pushing the large turnout spin as the crowds just weren't there.  Their wide-angle shots just couldn't get into 'throng-mode'

On a personal note I came into London Heathrow from overseas, yesterday morning.  The pilot warned passengers that we might experience delays at immigration, because of industrial action.  Result was that I got through the UK Border Control  post faster than I can ever recall!  They even had the automatic scanning machines working, which is something that they couldn't manage a couple of weeks ago, on a previous trip.

I believe that the 'rank and file members' of the public sector unions understand, as regards pensions (the supposed cause of the strike)  that

• They had a good deal.  Would have liked it to last but..
• The deal on offer is a good one - which is fair to them and moving to something more financially sustainable
• The deal on offer is still better than those that the taxpayer (that's the people that pay for the pensions, in case anyone forgets) can enjoy - much better in most cases.

In recent times, the government has been accused of being 'out of touch' with the electorate.  On this though, they have got it right and it is the union 'fat cats' that are out of touch with the public and, more importantly, with their members.

Perhaps now we will see greater scrutiny on the pay and perks packages of the union 'fat cats' just as we have seen on the executives at privately owned companies?  We can but hope.  This too is a scandal, at a time when we all have to 'tighten our belts'.

I just hate it when some union leader reaches over and tries to tighten my belt while insisting that he particularly and his members in general, should be allowed to freely sup from the public trough.  

While we are at it, I renew my call for the so called 'pilgrims' - full-time union officials who are employed and paid for by local and central government but work exclusively or predominantly, on union business (rather than what they were employed to work on!) -to end.  These 'pilgrims' are costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds.  Money which incidentally, is then saved by the unions so that they can fund the Labour Party, (so don't expect help from that quarter),  and can seek to create ever more opposition to a financially sustainable future.  That's right, we the taxpayer are paying for people to be employed and it is the job of these people to put their hands ever further into our (the taxpayer's) pockets and take our money!!  At least we get a chance to vote for politicians!!    

So what now, for the Coalition?

Firstly, both the Conservatives and the Lib Dems should understand that there is a message and it isn't n opportunity to put some kind of spin on things.

Yes, the last time that these seats were contested, these parties did well and so, the 'pendelum' effect means that this time they were almost bound to lose seats.  But, why both parties?  Why so heavily?  And, why, at a time when the public have moved towards understanding the need for austerity, (to at least varying degrees) would they move to ever higher spending Labour?  This is the same Labour that have never apologised for their economic incompetence!

It seems obvious to say, but the only answer is that the electorate that voted, wanted to punish the Coalition.  I don't believe it is because of the alleged cuts (check out the actual level of 'cuts' and you will see that public expenditure is being reduced at a far too low rate, if at all.)

No, I believe it's because the Coalition is fundamentally flawed.

Cameron and Clegg are committed to trying to do what is right for the country. 

• Cameron thinks this requires being magnanimous and a 'gentleman' - so he doesn't push Conservative policies down Clegg's throat - it's not the 'done thing'.
• Clegg was the photo-genic candidate for leader that could add votes for the Lib Dems and not scare the voters, while at the same time not getting in the way of the unruly Lib Dem MPs and party activists who wanted to continue to pursue their 'student' politics approach to life at Westminster or in local town halls.

So we have Cameron, bending over backwards to be nice to Clegg and Clegg unable to control his party.

Result?  The electorate see through this and see that the majority Coalition partner (the Conservatives, in case you have forgotten) are fumbling and have no coherent policy.  They have, to use the spin-meister phrase, no narrative. 

What do they stand for?

• If it's the 'Granny Tax' or 'Pasty Tax' why can't these be clearly enunciated?
• Why aren't we seeing power being reclaimed from Europe?
• Why is the UK supporting the failed Euro project?  Don't bother trying to say it's because they are a major trading partner and the rest of that.  We are throwing good money after bad and trying to deny the inevitable - the tide has turned and it's time to get off of the beach!
• Why is time being wasted on changing the definition of marriage?  Where is the groundswell of public clamour for this?
• Why are we funding and keeping our UK armed forces in Afghanistan?
• Why is parliamentary time to be wasted on reform of the House of Lords - I understand the Lib Dems want this but why can't the Conservatives adopt the Nancy Reagan response and 'Just say No!'

I could go on (and on and on) but you get the idea.

We have a Conservative led Coalition that seems to want to do everything that is un-Conservative, to kowtow to their junior partner and seems to have no idea, other than the retention of power, exactly what it is trying to do, in Government.

When will Conservative MPs understand that their complete acquiescence and obeisance to the Lib Dems means that they will pay the price at the ballot box, for their lack of a spine?

UKIP anyone?