I must express my sheer anger and disappointment with the recent 're-branding progress' the Labour Party is undergoing - specifically in the wrong hands of Peter Hain.
Again, the top brass of the party are conducting their 'listening exercises', but sadly not listening. 'Fresh Ideas', 'Refounding Labour'; call it what you will. Nothing is changing. We sold out our core vote, and we must try hard to reach them again. That is the working people of Britain, who want to pay tax fairly to create a fair and equal society, where every one has an equal start in life.
Ed Miliband can throw about cliched phrases like the 'squeezed-middle' but it just doesn't hold any weight. The squeezed middle? What about the squeezed poor? The people who are having their benefits slashed and are being savagely attacked by this ruthless Tory government?
I'm not proposing that I have all the answers, but we need to be honest with ourselves. The top tier of the party do not represent the core membership, and that is a severe problem. We are meant to be a Democratic Socialist party, yet we have a Social Democrat leader, who wants to appeal to the 'working-class Conservatives' out there.
Ed, we don't need Blue Labour. We've had that for the last 14 years. If you want to listen and learn, open your ears.
Thursday, 19 May 2011
Sunday, 9 January 2011
Tories talk tough but act soft on banker's bonuses
It is reported today that RBS Chief Executive, Stephen Hester, is set to pocket up to £7 million worth of bonuses and payments next month - even though Cameron called for RBS to set an example by paying 'smaller bonuses'. What makes it worse is that RBS is owned by the taxpayer at approximately 85%.
Next month, it is still expected that £7 billion worth of bonuses will be dished out to city bankers regardless of the amount of welfare cuts that have been issued to tackle the deficit. Surely they should be the ones setting an example as the ones who caused the financial crisis but are still being awarded obscene bonuses.
Alas its no great surprise that the Conservatives talked tough but acted soft on banker's bonuses. It is quite clear that we are not all in this together and it adds insult to injury when ordinary families are paying the cost of the economy instead of the people who wrecked it that are being rewarded.
Next month, it is still expected that £7 billion worth of bonuses will be dished out to city bankers regardless of the amount of welfare cuts that have been issued to tackle the deficit. Surely they should be the ones setting an example as the ones who caused the financial crisis but are still being awarded obscene bonuses.
Alas its no great surprise that the Conservatives talked tough but acted soft on banker's bonuses. It is quite clear that we are not all in this together and it adds insult to injury when ordinary families are paying the cost of the economy instead of the people who wrecked it that are being rewarded.
Saturday, 1 January 2011
A painful New Year ahead for local communities
Since its New Year, I would have hoped to talk about the prospects of a prosperous new year ahead of us. Unfortunately, this is the year that we will all feel the bite of the draconian cuts issued by the Coalition government. On Tuesday, we will see the regressive VAT rise go ahead - which will extinguish any signs of growth for businesses and hit the poorest families the hardest. However, what concerns me the most is the delivery of devastating cuts to local councils that are going to be implemented in the coming year.
Erick Pickles' Localism Bill is a big con like Cameron's plans for the 'Big Society'. The Localism Bill, introduced to Parliament on Monday, promises "a fundamental shift of power away from Westminster to councils, communities and homes across the nation". It all sounds well and good but the details are most displeasing.
In real terms, Government support to councils will be cut by 27% over the period of four years. We all agree that there needs to be efficiency savings made. But what I take issue with is that the poorest areas will be hit the hardest. Mr. Pickles says English spending power will fall by an average 4.4% and a maximum of 8.9% next year. If it is so 'fair' - the Coalition Government's favourite euphemism - then why isn't there a universal fixed number spending cut to all of the Councils in England?
Instead, what we have seen is grave injustices in the different amounts of cuts to Council funding. 12 of the 15 'winner' councils that are losing less than 2% of funding per year are Conservative Councils and these happen to be the wealthier areas such as Windsor and Buckinghamshire. Surprise, surprise. Whilst only 2 out of the 12 'loser' councils are under Conservative control, that are having a maximum of 8.9% of their funding slashed. The majority of the councils that are having the axe wielded the highest to them are Labour-run councils in some of the poorest areas in England.
This week leader of the council, Andrew De Freitas, promised that "all front line services will be protected". Well, that is a relief. And so is the welcoming news that we will look to make savings in the executive hierarchy of the council before making redundancies at the bottom of the services that people depend on. However, it appears our council will be hit with the maximum funding cut - so what will become of the leisure services, parks and libraries that will have to be slashed? Chalk one up for the 'Big Society'! According to Mr. Cable, he patronisingly thinks that libraries should be run by citizens in their free time. If that's the case, I'll welcome David Cameron down to run the local sports centres in Grimsby and Nick Clegg can run our local libraries. Get real.
Erick Pickles' Localism Bill is a big con like Cameron's plans for the 'Big Society'. The Localism Bill, introduced to Parliament on Monday, promises "a fundamental shift of power away from Westminster to councils, communities and homes across the nation". It all sounds well and good but the details are most displeasing.
In real terms, Government support to councils will be cut by 27% over the period of four years. We all agree that there needs to be efficiency savings made. But what I take issue with is that the poorest areas will be hit the hardest. Mr. Pickles says English spending power will fall by an average 4.4% and a maximum of 8.9% next year. If it is so 'fair' - the Coalition Government's favourite euphemism - then why isn't there a universal fixed number spending cut to all of the Councils in England?
Instead, what we have seen is grave injustices in the different amounts of cuts to Council funding. 12 of the 15 'winner' councils that are losing less than 2% of funding per year are Conservative Councils and these happen to be the wealthier areas such as Windsor and Buckinghamshire. Surprise, surprise. Whilst only 2 out of the 12 'loser' councils are under Conservative control, that are having a maximum of 8.9% of their funding slashed. The majority of the councils that are having the axe wielded the highest to them are Labour-run councils in some of the poorest areas in England.
This week leader of the council, Andrew De Freitas, promised that "all front line services will be protected". Well, that is a relief. And so is the welcoming news that we will look to make savings in the executive hierarchy of the council before making redundancies at the bottom of the services that people depend on. However, it appears our council will be hit with the maximum funding cut - so what will become of the leisure services, parks and libraries that will have to be slashed? Chalk one up for the 'Big Society'! According to Mr. Cable, he patronisingly thinks that libraries should be run by citizens in their free time. If that's the case, I'll welcome David Cameron down to run the local sports centres in Grimsby and Nick Clegg can run our local libraries. Get real.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)