shifting responsibility

Look at it at very basic principles. The Conservative government wants to get rid of any government led service provision and shift the responsibilities for everything onto the private individual.

That principle is what led to a recent tribunal decision whereby leaseholders of a block of flats lost and have to foot the bill for £3.000.000 worth of cladding removal, fire patrols and developers legal fees.

photo of green leaf potted plants on window and stand

Photo by Daria Shevtsova on Pexels.com

It is simply this principle of transferring everything from government to individuals, the principle of personal freedom and less taxes for all, that makes the indivduals pay.

Previously and post-war we had council estates, provided by local authorities, maintained and paid for and rented out.

I remember on our estate, the first flats for sale went for £5.000 for a 2 bedroom flat. Crazy prices. After that prices went gradually up to £5.000 for a 3-bedroom flat and now the prices are at £300.000 and rising for small flats.

But the difference is that every leaseholder is still responsible or all the costs of the block.

When I go to a residents meeting, most attendees are leaseholders and proud to be so but all are complaining about their costs. Apparently most of our Labour councillors are also all leaseholders of flats. So there is little difference in the Labour and Conservative activities.

It used to be Labour pro council housing and pro renting out. Now it’s all a mish-mash of ill-thought out policies and practises.

It simply is not working and people are deeply unhappy about the whole situation.

Nobody seems to practise what they preach anymore. There are no clear lines.

Obviously the sale of council flats has made living more expensive for everyone and raised the stress-levels. So why do it?

Advertisements

Can’t invade the rainforest

Just to follow on my previous post about the rainforest, I want to specialise in particular on how education forms the brain and is responsible for the thought processes taught in school.

I am not saying I hate those who have been misled but I am saying change the way we educate our children to stop that specialisation in short-term profit thinking.

It was perfectly possible to invade Iraq, Afthanistan, Germany and any other similar countries to stop genocide and war but it is not possible to invade the rainforest to stop deforestation. We cannot drop bombs onto trees to save the trees, the way we can drop bombs onto buildings and people to stop murderous regimes.

What human evolution sees at present is a part-time brain development, which sees people specialise in certain subjects.

We see people specialising only in their region and making as much profit as possible within and for their region without taking into account that the whole planet needs to function to make regional development sustainable.

Yet, education in developed countries hasn’t even touched what is required to maintain our planet.

Private education stupefies students to think about making profit, lead a country to obtain certain political goals, which are mainly profit related whilst state education or social education concentrates on wider issues like social responsibility.

I am a vehement opponent of private versus state education systems. I am in total favour of only one education system teaching all.

If we teach social and planetary responsibility in schools we will very soon get to the point that currently only each country that has rainforest within actually owns this rainforest.

That is simply how our legal minds work these days, you need to own and if you own you have total power over what you own.

British elite political thinking currently wants to turn away from collective responsibiliy by leaving the EU. But it doesn’t stop at the EU, it stops at the point where the whole earths’ ecosystem is in danger because we do not own the rainforest together as a collectively important earth environment.

There is no other way as creating earth collective ownership if we want to preserver any type of natural self-regulation on the planet. Even as EU states we all need to work towards earths preservation with rules that apply to all nations.

We need to get away from our indivindualistic profit making mentality and work together as human beings who have only one planet to live on.

the rainforest

Is without question one of the most importent assets of our planet. It is concentrated on various geographical locations. Lets take Brazil here as an example.

green leafed trees under blue sky

The typical British countrydise, cleared of forest, ready for farming. Photo by Lisa Fotios on Pexels.com

Of course us developed nations we have already cleared a lot of our forests and developed our lands. We in Britain even talk about becoming self-sufficient farming-wise to justify us leaving the EU without a deal.

For that of course we need to farm the land and clear probably even more forest.

We really do love to rely on the rain forest. The untouched and virgin rain forest, that same rain forest that saves our planet.

But what about those nationas that are couched within the rainforest areas. Nations like Brazil. Do their citizens not have the right to farm, to develp the land, to get skills-based jobs that are based within their national borders.

scenic view of rainforest

Rainforst    Photo by Arnie Chou on Pexels.com

Whilst we here in Britain demand that we can become independent of others, we do expect nations within the rainforest regions to leave that forest and just not devleop, to depend on others, help others, so that we developed countries can stay developing ourselves.

What are the nationals within the rainforest countries supposed to be doing?

Nobody has thought about this and I think that just shows how stupid our privately educated politicians and business leaders are because all they can think of is themselves.

It is an international problem and it needs nations to work together. But of course our political leaders only think about Brexit and becoming indendent from Europe and use the resources of other nations to bolster our own wealth.

The rainforest? The rainforest is depended upon that it stays as it is. So what about putting that thinking cap on?

fast movers

red bus on road near big ben in london

Photo by Daria Shevtsova on Pexels.com

The urban myth that you need a car in London to get around, is really a myth. Scientific examination of transport has proven the following:

The following numbers came up or moving people around town:

  • 22.000 people using trains
  • 19.000 people walking
  • 14.000 people cycling
  • 9.000 people using buses
  • 2.000 people using private cares.

Read about all the details on New Scientist from where I gotten those numbers.

I had a dad who worked just down the road and needed to take his car to drive there. So that car dependence is just a little bit of an addiction.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan will let us have a car-free day on 22. September 2019. I love the idea, better than the whinging Boris Johnson always did talk about needing large family saloons all the time.

Apparently Talk London is consulting on having car-free days once a month. Bring it on.

London Transport is amazing, with Central Line trains running every minute.

 

 

kicking cans

If the promise to leave the EU is as strong as the promise to reduce carbon emissions to zero by 2050 are of the same strenght, then we can assume that this government is just a promise but no action government.

What we get are sincere, deep voices, manly promises, but nothing changes, really.

Greenpeace thought of getting the grey cells of some politicians into motion but that didn’t have any effect, other than being pushed out of the event.

Action speaks louder than words but words are all what some people can come up with. The dinners, the speeches, the outfits, the glamour.

I am not certain that our politicians these days have the mental capacity or even flexibility to actually change anything that moves them out of their current comfort zones.

I don’t care whether we get Brexit or not, but what I care about is that our quality of life increases.

And I don’t believe those who say they are so totally Green because they all use medications and modern technology that was borne out of dirty production methods and using fossil fuels. They all have cars and use flights.

We need to start somewhere and how about changing the way we fund and perceive our schools?

Why not make sure that all schools are enabling our pupils and future generations to breathe in clean air? That all our pupils get plenty of palying fields and green spaces?

If we really want to change our lives, we need to change the way we calculate profits, taxes and distribution of wealth, ownership. In fact we need to redefine the meaning of wealth to include

  • health
  • environment

You cannot sell a walk in the forest for profit, you cannot sell the rainforest because it needs to be wild and just as it is. You cannot sell the ocean because it needs to stay and we cannot sell the north or south pole because we need it just as it is.

Yet there are two things, which are wars and space exploration, which create more carbon emission than a lot of other items. Also the production of white goods and anything that uses metals is highly contageous. Calculate your carbon footprint here.

Lets think about that for a while.

Removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere using machines is simply not creating the bio diversity we need to keep the environment healthy and evacuating from earth to another planet is nothing but wishful dreaming.

I must admit, I just love living in our civilisation, the freedom that women can have would be not even half as good in a primitive low carbon society.

Yet there is still the possibility of an educated low carbon society, something we probably all dream about. Articles 25 and 26 of the Universal Human Rights deal with health and education whilst the vast majority of paragraphs deal with legal definitions of personal freedoms.

Perhaps that declaration of Human Rights, should include taking care of our planet as an obligation and right for all of us.

Health first

action activity adult athletes

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

The best part about being a human is being as healthy as possible. At least that is what we are striving for.

Here in Tower Hamlets, school children are thought to have 10% less lung capacity, compared to children in rural areas.

Tower Hamlets schools are normally encoached in busy traffic areas, with roads, right, left and centre.

For example Bishop Challoner School is unfortunately a good example of a school being in a totally traffic polluted area. The school is judged ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted because of exam results only. The school is siutated in Commercial Road.

For Ofsted good results are everything, they do not consider other health considerations when they judge a school, which I think is very sad indeed.

On the other hand, Raine’s Foundation school, is a secondary school situated near Victoria Park, an area classified as almost suburban, with leafy streets, access to Victoria Park for PE and much less traffic, as roads around the building are one lane only.

Raine’s Foundation school is classified as ‘in need of improvement’ by Ofsted and because of this, parents won’t apply to send their kids there.

Parents as well as Ofsted only care about exam results.

Tower Hamlets Council  now wants to close Raine’s Foundation school because of the poor exam results, poor in comparison to national results.

Why does nobody care about the children’s health? Isn’t it better to run a school in a healthy area because the kids will be better off throughout their life, if their lungs breathe healthy air?

I personally want to fight to keep the school open just to give children the chance to attend a healthy school. Because sacrificing health in exchange for good exam results will have long-lasting effects on the children’s health.

Access to green spaces, a nice playground, a nearby park will have a great effect not only on children’s mental health but also the physical health.

I want everybody to write to their MP to ask for support to change the classification criteria for schools in respect of a healthy environment.

Europe is going round and round – til the end of civilisation

As soon as Rory thinks he can get a majority in parliament for the deal that Theresa May has negotiated, the Labour Party seems to want to go for a second referendum in any case.

This means it is a no brainer that the Europe question cannot be resolved in the short term because if Labour doesn’t support the deal and wants a second referendum, then there will not be a majority for the existing deal.

Interestingly on the Victoria Derbyshire program the idea was mentioned that if Europe refuses a further extension, this would lead to parliament approving the deal but not if Europe keeps on giving extensions.

What really is important is that these questions affect different people in different ways.

There are

the farmers who say they cannot sell their products to Europe without a deal

the Irish who do not want a hard border

The manufacturers who move out of Britain because of disturbed trading with Europe

the self-employed businesses who have a large European customer base

the politicians who favour a strong monarchy rather than being ruled by a largely republican democracy

the Scots and Welsh who want to remain in Europe

the problem of not finding a solution is that on both sides, e.g. the Remainers and the leavers people vote for different motives.

Also, within the UK political parties want to get the majority in government so come up with political tactics that gets them the majority in parliament.

It seems to be a bit of a lock down.

Obviously the most agreed on part of politics is the Unity of Britain. Unfortunately, not even the so sensible Rory Stewart has mentioned the problems his deal causes for Wales or Scotland. That wasn’t discussed at all in the debate yesterday either.

I don’t think that Britain will leave Europe anytime soon, never mind what they all promise.

The unity of England, Scotland, Wales is the most important consideration that politicians will have and is most likely to down the Conservatives because they do not put the sentiments of the Scottish and Welsh or Irish voters first.

Scotland has already lined up a new independence referendum and has started their own negotiations with Europe on membership.

What I do not quite understand is why Labour keeps Jeremy Corbyn as their leader when he obviously quite strongly upsets the Conservative thinkers on all levels the latest has to do with his pro-Iranian views.

Obviously, Jeremy Corbyn is the one person that stops Labour from getting the middle ground to vote for the party. This of course has helped the Liberals to gain more support again. Greens also gained a lot on environmental issues.

Forget about political parties, vote for policies instead. Political parties ultimately hinder any kind of progress because as well as wanting to keep the absolute power, they do tactics that keep them in power and not policies which are necessarily best.

History has shown time and time again that the majority of people doesn’t always realise and or isn’t powerful enough to change a political course.

For example people should be allowed to vote on policies for instance

Vote for or against renewable energy

Vote for or against using plastics

Vote for or against having political relations with countries who are human rights abusers

rather than vote for a party that can have policies, which are unsustainable.

There are quite a few articles online, whereby scientists predict that civilisation will end in 30 years.

Weather will deteriorate, harvests will be disturbed, travel will be interrupted, communications may be bad.

I don’t think that our basic infrastructure will change much within areas that won’t be flooded but our government does very little to prepare for flood area predictions and keeps on planning like nothing is going to happen.

How are they planning to cope with those future earth warming immigrants, those who have to vacate their current land because it is flooded and seek safer shelter? Where will those move within Britain who will get flooded?

Europe is our nearest neighbour and transport to our nearest neighbour is always easiest. We do not know how viable the Euro tunnel will be in worsening weather conditions, but we need to ensure that we have reasonable relations with our nearest neighbours.

We cannot rely on the rich to help the masses because the rich can always go wherever they want; it’s us poor people who cannot escape we need to make the best of what we’ve got.

What about the fire service?

Currently the most powerful person in Britain is obviously the Chairman of the Conservative Muslim Forum, who said he will resign his Conservative membership if Boris Johnson becomes the new leader.

Mohammed Amin MP, will not forget what Boris said and neither should we forget that Boris Johnson is responsible for reducing the number of fire fighters we have in London and who avtively asked for the reduction in fire stations.

A loss of Muslim support will bring a lot more Labour voters at the next general election guaranteed.

That is especially important on the day that Grenfell victims hold a memorial service.

Unfortunately most Conservatives who voted for Boris Johnson in the leadership race so far, live in the past, they only remember the good old times but have forgotten what happened since the London Mayor Johnson.

Doing Brexit is not the most important issue in Britain at the moment. Causing widespread unrest in Britain with a Boris selections is.

And would Boris Johnson want to entice business to invest in climate friendly technology with his blank cheque offer of tax cuts for the rich?

 

detachment is responsible

standing family near fireplace

Photo by Victoria Borodinova on Pexels.com Family

I think that the reason for the rise in the crime rate and especially gang related crime, e.g. knife crime, gangs, drugs is the destabilisation of family life.

As I stated in my previous post about renting, currently in Britain, an average renter only stays for 4 years in a flat. People are moved around the country, into areas they do not know anybody just to get a roof over their head. Some call it de-gentrification of inner cities like London.

Renters conditions have been changed, so that a permanent tenancy is now hard to come by. the old-fashioned flats for life, people could pass on to a relative have largely gone.

Additionally the emigration rate through wars in far away lands has unsettled large amounts of people around the globe who also add to the new additions to society.

group of people in a meeting

Photo by rawpixel.com on Pexels.com Work place

Families are destabilised because in families now all family members have to work. Decades ago one family member could stay at home until a child reached the age of 13, that is now reduced to the age of 5.

In practise that means if a family has older children in schools, those kids often find themselves without a parent after school.

The close family contact between people no longer exists. Employment conditions have become more and more unpredictable, income can vary tremendously with times of hard-ship, e.g. reliance on food banks.

All these uncertainties contribute considerably to making gangs attractive to young people. Especially vulnerable youngster get picked off the expelled pupils registers to work for Post code drug gangs.

It really has nothing to do with the keeping people busy, it has a lot to do with giving people the right to be the boss of their own life, to have a right to a family life and give kids the guidance they need.

man lights legs silhouette

Photo by Tookapic on Pexels.com     Gang member

Gang bosses can give plenty of guidance and that is why they are so successful recruiting youngsters. Those youngsters then are led to believe that carrying a knife is the only way to stay safe, its either kill or get killed. That is the terrible fact about the current crime scene.

Whilst youth funding is cut back, police officers reduced and parents are stuck into jobs through the work program, there is nobody available to give a shoulder to lean on for our young people.

Families just can’t help each other out any longer easily, they often live apart, have been moved to different parts of the country or world and have no longer any time for each other.

Until a government restores our sense of family, gives people the dignity of having permanent homes and permanent jobs, I do not see an end to the current problems. People need to belong and feel they are safe and increasing the instabilities is not going to help. The government needs to show some sympathy, emphathy for people. We are not just all robots who follow work rosters.

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.

 

 

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries

Blog Stats

  • 52,762 hits