Rushanara a proud remainer

Just got the first Labour leaflet through my door and Rushanara Ali states she is a proud remainer.

So much for all those on TV debates who call Labour pro leave and waiting to do the Brexit. Either Rushanara has an individual deal as local and established MP or Labour has a general policy of remain.

I am happy about this because that clears the air with those who will argue for pro-remain and keep on saying Labour is for Leave. Rushanara also argues for a People’s vote on the issue, which is fair.

The last referendum was years ago and so wishy-washy, it was unable to be executed. This time round people should get acceptable optionso n Brexit with the referendum.

I will be voting Labour this time because years of austerity have left Britain starving of investment. Rushanara is always communicating about issues, I contact her with.

Our technology is behind Japan, who as a similar Island nation are fully covered with broadband.

Fibre broadband everywhere will attract investment and also provide important security for all parts of Britain. I also hope that Labour will introduce free University education for students of British students in Britain.

I don’t think that private broadband firms have the money to put on a full network of cabelling throughout Britain because they would need the money for the work, which remote people and villages simply could not afford.

The lack of communications facility through a lack of broadband makes our communities vulnerable to abuse by criminals, who have advanced technological methods to their advantage. Our residents and businesses need to be able to communicate with law enforcement and potential customers for business ventures.

Free university education should save a lot of money in administration fees for the scheme that is currently in place. Students simply do not constantly want those depressing letters, telling them how much they own and how much the debt has increased with added interest. Perhaps one could ask for a contribution to university education once a student has graduated and gotten established with a very well paid post without sending constant letters reminding them. Perhaps one could attach a clause waving any pay back of the degree will be benefitting the UK.

Many other countries have nationalised utilities, which the Tories have all privatised with detrimental effect on services. Tories are crazy about privatisation and put the principle before effect. Any policy is only as good as the service it provides.

 

Deal or no deal

With the oncoming general election the Conservatives are striving to get into government once again, which would lengthen their stretch by another 5 years.

Promises to end fracking, raise benefits by the inflation level from next year is meant to appeal to those poor who are leaning towards the Leave campaign but are natural Labour voters.

I think that offer is not good enough. What about the rubbish housing laws that see the poor misplaced and moved out of areas into short-term tenancies?

What about working conditions that don’t even allow workers to determine when they want to take a holiday, gave us zero-hour contracts?

And of course the promise of the Labour Party to end the misery caused by tuitition fees will be very attractive to large swathes of the population, even the middle classes will like it.

Free care for the elderly will attract everybody who has some property and does not want to have to sell it to pay for care.

The Conservative Party even gotten rid of the maintenance allowance for poorer students. That was a payment of around 3 – 4.000 pounds per year to help students with rent and living costs whilst studying. The first act the Conservative government did was to stop the Child Trust Fund, which paid money into an account created for every newborn child.

A rise of benefits with inflation will not even touch the loss of other major needs.

The benefits freeze was initiated by George Osborne, who then opted to leave the government. Osborne also was a big influence on the decision to hold the referendum that still haunts this nation for years to come.

Labour can’t loose this general election

Corbyn has the winning formula.

He appeals to

  • the young by promising to abolish university tuitition fees
  • the middle ages by supporting young students and older relatives and by improving workers rights, health care and public transport.
  • the old by promising free health care.

Nobody cannot vote for this unless they are rich and do not rely on public services. Since the rich are in the minority, they cannot possibly win any election.

Even though I fell out with Labour big time some years ago, this new election manifesto is likely to be a big winner.

people in line

Photo by Cátia Matos on Pexels.com

We have listened to the repetitive speeches how the Conservatives increased the employment rate but forgotten to mention that those people also increasingly rely on food banks.

We need social mobility

The former Conservative slogan ‘Britain isn’t working’ showing people queueing for work could now be altered to show people queueing for food instead whilst they got jobs now.

The Brexit disaster is a great example why we need more social mobility.  It’s the way this Brexit story came about that makes the case.

At the time David Cameron and George Osborne formed that young Conservative government. Both pals from university, one could almost feel the connection those two had. They both felt strong and nothing bad could ever happen was the feeling they radiated out to us.

And then David Cameron cooked up this recipe for disaster, which is called the Brexit vote. Now we have nothing but division and dismay over this Brexit referendum when the country was split in half by it.  51.89% leave and 48.11% remain. David Cameron himself then left his post as prime minister as he was obviously upset by the results, which he did not expect and his old friend George Osborne followed David’s example to leave government as well.

Yet these two had a lot of power to set up British political events for decades to come, those two uni pals. Apparently many people in powerful public positions know each other from university. In Britain the two most influental universities are Cambridge and Oxford.

There are now some MPs who say we need to honour the outcome of the vote,

The vote was badly set up, it simply asked: ” Do you want to leave or remain in the European Union?”

Obviously things are not that easy. There are contracts and terms and conditions to respect. Only if the policital system in the EU was so bad that we would rather fight them then deal with them could we even consider not honouring our contractual obligations.

The vote itself was very badly set up, very short-sighted.

Neither politicians nor the public were properly informed what staying in or leaving actually implied.

People were not asked whether they want to just leave without a deal or what kind of further relationship they want and that insincerity now causes all the problems.

I blame to a great extent the lack of social mobility because the same mates that go to uni together then find themselves in position of power. If universities get populated more by people who come from different walks of life the whole emotional backdrop would not exist and people would become more rational and actually examine their own mindsets and the whole thought processes in depths.

What now also becomes apparent, is that after years of Conservative government the cracks begin to show. More and more companies close down, or get moved to Europe or other parts of the world. The only way the employment rate is kept high because people are driven into self-employment or zero hours contracts. Apparently many people have to do questionable things to be able to cope with Universal Credit, a system that causes immense misery to more vulnerable people. It also exploits women who are driven into doing things they normally would not do to survive.

Britain is now the least family-friendly country in Europe according to UNICEF.

That current benefit system is self-serving, it keeps the low very low and stoops them lower whilst it supports the government and allows them to keep huge amounts of savings in case of no deal Brexit. So the Brexit saga was merely an instrument to increase the misery of the poor.

Perhaps it is worth examining the data the Department of Works and Pension holds to find out how it is possible to have such a high rate of employment when the press is daily filled with company closures.

It is quite apparent to everyone that most of our high street shops have closed in favour of food outlets and that footfall in highstreet has dramatically decreased.

Social mobility would stop such crass disputes in parliament because the two sides created through our elitist education would not emerge to that extent. Working class and richer kids could mix in uni at student level and get to know each other then instead of clashing later. If there were more people from poor backgrounds involved in government, the policies would change to take more care of the vulnerable citizens.

The emergency of the Change UK new party is a direct result of social clashes and people who want to overcome them.

The only good thing I can say about Food banks is that they are better than the food stamps Hitler used to give to the people he liked and refused to give to the people he let starve to death. Food banks are relatively easy to use and people can access them.

Yet, a political system that boasts full employment but makes those employees relying on food banks despite a minimum and national living wage is obviously very flawed.

 

 

A wake-up call for Cameron

Whilst Osborne is bathing himself in the glory of the recent IMF findings on his economics policy, academics in Britain are not so sure that the changes to education and in particular university funding are equally well thought out. It must be a concern to any government if no less than 175 Oxford academics put forward a motion of no confidence in a policy. Even the biggest enthusiast has to take this into account. There is a talk of a funding gap, that figures were miscalculated. But having this happen at such a level is a bit above the joke factor really.

I think it is merely an inflationary policy to raise uni fees that much, leading to price rises all around and helping to create that untouchable academic elite, the chosen few, who cannot even be sued by the little man any longer because legal aid is withdrawn simultaneously. It literally then boils down to being one of the chosen few and its history in the making. A selection process will take place to ascertain who is worthy of being on the top of the pie. How fair that is going to be is another question.

Labour hugely inflated student numbers with an even more inflated number of subjects to study whilst the Conservatives now drill it down to a minimum number of students with less subjects to study. It’s again a case of swift changes that have not properly been thought through. I became aware that posts of such policy making powers pay consultants up to £300 per hour and that is a lot of pay for being able to continue playing your Facebook games like Mafia Wars and FarmVille. Why is it that people in key jobs cannot do such decisions themselves but have to pay others in to do the work for them. Why are jobs not given to those who are able instead of having to purchase the talent in at huge prices?

There is talk  that the whole funding model is wrongly calculated and wow that is more than embarrassing. The question already arises how have the people to decide that funding model been chosen? I think the whole of the UK upper crust in academic and political terms is highly selective and the should be overhauled to allow better talents to be discovered and get a chance to sort out the mess properly. It really is a matter of elitism to get to a stage whereby leaders simply tap each other on the shoulder, praising each other’s mess as if it was the best thing to do. They have to listen to the voices of so many Oxford academics who should know what they are talking about. I blame the 5 yearly elections for such situations arising because that is the pattern in which changes have to take place. There is no open dialogue and a very small number of people are responsible for large scale changes that affect all of us and are not properly thought through.

There must be a fundamental change in attitude to even consider who the people are who devise such changes. I think the UK has to have less secrecy and more open dialogue and fairness all around. During the run-up to the elections all we ever read was about Michael Gove’s ideas and no indication was made to the general public to submit ideas on education policy and proposed changed. It was a sudden decision that had been dreamed up by a very few select few people literally overnight. I think such fundamental matters must be more transparent and more people involved into the decision making process.

Blog Stats

  • 53,135 hits