On his visit to Cardiff today, the deputy PM, Nick Clegg spoke about the cuts, urging people to keep them "in perspective". Whilst there are some economic grounds for cuts, he should be more honest about the "perspective" side of things. The government is expected to reduce public spending by around 25% over the next five years. This is not only going to cause huge economic pressures, we will have the largest employment upheaval since the war. Yes, the economy as a whole might cope, but we have to be honest, when put in perspective the cuts hard, very hard. We're going to have a very different kind of country in five years time.
Our public services, some of the very institutions that give our nation uniqueness in this ever more homogenous world, will lose their status. And with the inevitable increase in protests, violent crime, and disorder as people lose their jobs, should we really be cutting spending for the judiciary and the police? I think we need to keep increasing NHS funding, instead of just not cutting. NHS trusts have enormous (and rising) PFI debts to pay, and if we don't keep up the flow of money, patient care will be hit. The redevelopment of the JR site would have cost £170-180 million, but with PFI we will pay over £830 million. We are already seeing job losses in Oxford's front line services. Whilst we shouldn't make Clegg a scapegoat, he could have more humility when it comes to people losing their jobs, otherwise he could be next in the firing line, if the current opinion poll trend continues.
Tuesday, 18 May 2010
Sunday, 9 May 2010
A stitch up and a con
The Liberal Democrats cosying up to the Tories is a sign that tactical voting does not work. Where I live, thousands of principled progressive voters voted Lib Dem to "keep the Tories out", as the Lib Dems insisted that voting Labour / Green was a waste of a vote. This, like in many other constituency was a dirty and wicked tactic, and shows the lack of logic behind their campaign strategy. No vote is a waste, it is a strong message that that voter was not satisfied with the other parties and they need to do better.
So much for the "vote Lib Dem here to keep the Tories out" slogan. This is complete rubbish as we can now see. The two parties do, by their own admission, share ground on some "key policy issues". The Tories won in my constituency, and the Liberal Democrat party looks set to form a coalition with the frankly rotten, out of touch and selfish Tories who's principles do not stretch beyond the interests of the wealthy and big corporations. This stitch up of a fake "good party" and the "wannabee good party" is a sickeningly vile form of anti-democracy. A majority of voters voted for progressive parties with competent manifestos favouring electoral form of our rotten and corrupt system. Now one of these parties has betrayed millions who may have otherwise voted for Labour, SNP, Plaid or The Green Party.
I say to the Lib Dems, "shame on you", this is a morally decrepit move that shows what you really are. Any alliance with the Tories is only a way of illegitimately bolstering their power, thus delivering more wealth for the few and less services and action for the many. The Lib Dems came into this election as a thoughroughly anti-Tory party, now we know that this was completely dishonest and they are undeserving of tactical anti Tory support in the future. The Tories/Lib Dems will slash spending on public services and raise our taxes, when they should be locking up greedy bankers. The Lib Dem leadership can be likened to the Sheriff of Nottinghams' henchman- the infamous character- Guy of Guisbourne, stopping Robin Hood from doing his good work.
Perhaps one day the people will learn that tactical voting doesn't work, and democracy only works if you truly vote for what you believe in. The Labour Party have had their time and have well and truly let us down. UKIP and the BNP are conspiracy theorists, xenophobes, and in the BNPs case NAZIs. The only party with a FULLY costed, well thought out, manifesto built on fairness and justice is the Green Party. For goodness sake, in the next election (when they tell you to get it right and have another go), get it right, vote Green!
In a year or so, having failed to form a proper government, the old parties will come back to us and ask us to "get it right", even when they failed so spectacularly to "get it right" themselves. We need to tell them this by voting for a positive, different party. Don't fear radical change. Fear years more of the old ruling class dominating the way we live. Take pack power, let the Green Party sort things out, and then we can all be satisfied with our votes.
So much for the "vote Lib Dem here to keep the Tories out" slogan. This is complete rubbish as we can now see. The two parties do, by their own admission, share ground on some "key policy issues". The Tories won in my constituency, and the Liberal Democrat party looks set to form a coalition with the frankly rotten, out of touch and selfish Tories who's principles do not stretch beyond the interests of the wealthy and big corporations. This stitch up of a fake "good party" and the "wannabee good party" is a sickeningly vile form of anti-democracy. A majority of voters voted for progressive parties with competent manifestos favouring electoral form of our rotten and corrupt system. Now one of these parties has betrayed millions who may have otherwise voted for Labour, SNP, Plaid or The Green Party.
I say to the Lib Dems, "shame on you", this is a morally decrepit move that shows what you really are. Any alliance with the Tories is only a way of illegitimately bolstering their power, thus delivering more wealth for the few and less services and action for the many. The Lib Dems came into this election as a thoughroughly anti-Tory party, now we know that this was completely dishonest and they are undeserving of tactical anti Tory support in the future. The Tories/Lib Dems will slash spending on public services and raise our taxes, when they should be locking up greedy bankers. The Lib Dem leadership can be likened to the Sheriff of Nottinghams' henchman- the infamous character- Guy of Guisbourne, stopping Robin Hood from doing his good work.
Perhaps one day the people will learn that tactical voting doesn't work, and democracy only works if you truly vote for what you believe in. The Labour Party have had their time and have well and truly let us down. UKIP and the BNP are conspiracy theorists, xenophobes, and in the BNPs case NAZIs. The only party with a FULLY costed, well thought out, manifesto built on fairness and justice is the Green Party. For goodness sake, in the next election (when they tell you to get it right and have another go), get it right, vote Green!
In a year or so, having failed to form a proper government, the old parties will come back to us and ask us to "get it right", even when they failed so spectacularly to "get it right" themselves. We need to tell them this by voting for a positive, different party. Don't fear radical change. Fear years more of the old ruling class dominating the way we live. Take pack power, let the Green Party sort things out, and then we can all be satisfied with our votes.
Sunday, 11 April 2010
Media sensorship will kill off good ideas.
Whilst complaints about the electoral system being unfair may be commonly associated to the Liberal Democrats and their age old plans for more proportional representation, the effects of our voting system don't just go as far as who ends up sitting in parliament. The news networks are pretty much required to give parties coverage according to their seats in parliament, instead of their actual support. I'm not suggesting this is the correct alternative, but the rules need changing because minorities are squeezed out of any significant representation in the "first past the post system" they are also prevented from getting a look in on TV. Since it is the media that shape people's opinions, with broadcasts such as the news and the upcoming debates between the leaders of the three biggest parties, the three party system is likely to remain.
Sadly it would seem that many take the term "minority" to mean bad. Such rash dismissals of anything other than the status quo are shameful malapropisms, but these are not the fault of the average couch potato- they have instead routinely and deliberately been forced upon the common individual by the media with the overuse of language such as "extreme" in a subtle to and orderly strategy to frighten the viewers into conforming with the presenters own views. The media routinely neglect variety in the desire to dumb down their content and foster their much loved simplifications of the world we live in.
Since there is little or no coverage of parties such as The Greens, UKIP, Respect, and The BNP, the general public is left in the dark as to their policies, leaving their chances of picking up support less likely. It also means that people fail to understand these parties. Most would agree that the BNP are an extreme right wing party with some racist or discriminatory policies, but since they are scarcely exposed on the TV many clueless voters looking to protest will stick their cross in a box such as this.
On the other hand, more moderate smaller parties such as The UK Independence Party, The Green Party, and Respect (who have one MP) are not given the coverage they deserve. In the european parliamentary elections in May 2009, UKIP received the second largest number of votes, and the Greens and BNP both polled highly- 10% and 8% respectively, both gaining 2 MEPs. This was largely thought to be because people realized that their vote would count, even if it were for a party that would be traditionally withheld from representation through unfair vote counting systems (like the one we have for the Westminster parliament).
When taken on issues alone, the powers that be are mainly not first place. In fact data from polling websites shows that the Green Party is by far the most popular on policies alone. A website which takes visitors through a series of categories (the economy, the NHS, crime, immigration, the environment, and so on) and presents them with a set of six policies (without revealing party names), shows that people do not suppor the old political norms when it comes to policies on anything like the level they are represented in parliament. When you look at the data we have on of the most disgusting perversions of democracy you can get. With close to 100,000 responses, this website (voteforpolicies.com) found that over 28% people would be best matched to supporting the Green Party, with the Conservatives and Labour party far behind on around 17%.
It's not as though there as been a sea change in public opinion though. It's just that our political system is designed to maintain the status quo and censor alternative ideas. The Labour Party and Conservative party normally hold over 80% of seats in parliament, but now we can see that only 33% of those who vote actually suppor there policies over the over parties. What's more, only half of the electorate vote, and even less are allowed to vote- for example, there no votes at sixteen even though you can marry e.t.c. What we are left with is a parliament where 80% of the elected members have the ideas of just 10% of the people. They might as well rigg the ballot.
Sadly it would seem that many take the term "minority" to mean bad. Such rash dismissals of anything other than the status quo are shameful malapropisms, but these are not the fault of the average couch potato- they have instead routinely and deliberately been forced upon the common individual by the media with the overuse of language such as "extreme" in a subtle to and orderly strategy to frighten the viewers into conforming with the presenters own views. The media routinely neglect variety in the desire to dumb down their content and foster their much loved simplifications of the world we live in.
Since there is little or no coverage of parties such as The Greens, UKIP, Respect, and The BNP, the general public is left in the dark as to their policies, leaving their chances of picking up support less likely. It also means that people fail to understand these parties. Most would agree that the BNP are an extreme right wing party with some racist or discriminatory policies, but since they are scarcely exposed on the TV many clueless voters looking to protest will stick their cross in a box such as this.
On the other hand, more moderate smaller parties such as The UK Independence Party, The Green Party, and Respect (who have one MP) are not given the coverage they deserve. In the european parliamentary elections in May 2009, UKIP received the second largest number of votes, and the Greens and BNP both polled highly- 10% and 8% respectively, both gaining 2 MEPs. This was largely thought to be because people realized that their vote would count, even if it were for a party that would be traditionally withheld from representation through unfair vote counting systems (like the one we have for the Westminster parliament).
When taken on issues alone, the powers that be are mainly not first place. In fact data from polling websites shows that the Green Party is by far the most popular on policies alone. A website which takes visitors through a series of categories (the economy, the NHS, crime, immigration, the environment, and so on) and presents them with a set of six policies (without revealing party names), shows that people do not suppor the old political norms when it comes to policies on anything like the level they are represented in parliament. When you look at the data we have on of the most disgusting perversions of democracy you can get. With close to 100,000 responses, this website (voteforpolicies.com) found that over 28% people would be best matched to supporting the Green Party, with the Conservatives and Labour party far behind on around 17%.
It's not as though there as been a sea change in public opinion though. It's just that our political system is designed to maintain the status quo and censor alternative ideas. The Labour Party and Conservative party normally hold over 80% of seats in parliament, but now we can see that only 33% of those who vote actually suppor there policies over the over parties. What's more, only half of the electorate vote, and even less are allowed to vote- for example, there no votes at sixteen even though you can marry e.t.c. What we are left with is a parliament where 80% of the elected members have the ideas of just 10% of the people. They might as well rigg the ballot.
Conservatives plan "National Citzens Service"
Finally the Conservative party have explained how they will pay for keeping up a high standard of public services whilst cutting the budget! The solution is a cunning and exploitative scheme to force young people to ancillary/low paid jobs for no pay at all- all under the nice sounding "voluntary" banner.
The plan is essential to put all 16 year olds on a 2 month summer camp, the kind of thing that brings up images of the Nazi youth in my mind; and send them off to work for things like looking after old people.
This plan is both flawed and evil. If 16 year olds were forced to work (which is of course slavery), probably because the old Tories think that all young people are yobs who need a bit of social enlightenment then; firstly these people couldn't be working in an alternative (paid) job of there choice; secondly they could be doing something more enlightening the looking after old people- like socialising with each other instead of watching TV / playing computer games / listening to music all day; and lastly (allthough there is more to be said) the people being cared for by these slaves would be saving money and getting richer whilst they should be paying for their care.
We have got to a point in this society where people expect something for nothing. Young people are saddled with rising debt / costs, as they are increasingly heavily marketed too, forcing each individual to buy more and more things to keep up there image and compete with there peers. On the other hand, as you move higher up the age groups people typically become richer, and often have savings to draw upon. Why then should we force impoverished young people to work for them without pay?
Some people will read this and react in anger, claiming that young people are loaded and that they always spend lavishly. This is a shocking misconseption. In reality the average 16 year old has a £800 disposable each year- which is around 35 times less than the typical working adult. Admittedly they may not have to account for utility bills or mortgage payment (although in many cases they will only inherit these debts when there parents die).
It's time we ended the inequality gap by fairer policies on government investment and taxation. The tories need to wake up and stop treating youngsters like puppets just becuase they can't vote to stop it.
The plan is essential to put all 16 year olds on a 2 month summer camp, the kind of thing that brings up images of the Nazi youth in my mind; and send them off to work for things like looking after old people.
This plan is both flawed and evil. If 16 year olds were forced to work (which is of course slavery), probably because the old Tories think that all young people are yobs who need a bit of social enlightenment then; firstly these people couldn't be working in an alternative (paid) job of there choice; secondly they could be doing something more enlightening the looking after old people- like socialising with each other instead of watching TV / playing computer games / listening to music all day; and lastly (allthough there is more to be said) the people being cared for by these slaves would be saving money and getting richer whilst they should be paying for their care.
We have got to a point in this society where people expect something for nothing. Young people are saddled with rising debt / costs, as they are increasingly heavily marketed too, forcing each individual to buy more and more things to keep up there image and compete with there peers. On the other hand, as you move higher up the age groups people typically become richer, and often have savings to draw upon. Why then should we force impoverished young people to work for them without pay?
Some people will read this and react in anger, claiming that young people are loaded and that they always spend lavishly. This is a shocking misconseption. In reality the average 16 year old has a £800 disposable each year- which is around 35 times less than the typical working adult. Admittedly they may not have to account for utility bills or mortgage payment (although in many cases they will only inherit these debts when there parents die).
It's time we ended the inequality gap by fairer policies on government investment and taxation. The tories need to wake up and stop treating youngsters like puppets just becuase they can't vote to stop it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)