Printable View
Does anybody know where these cabinet ministers are hiding I've heard it said they are being deliberately kept of our screens ,but I don't believe it so where are Leadsom, Truss, Coffey , Villiers, Wallace, Hancock, Shapps , Patel. Surely Cummings doesn't believe they wouldn't lie for him
no, But I did notice Patel hiding behind the Bisto packet in my kitchen cupboard this morning
Truss. Isn't she the delightful Minister who, when asked about the 50K more nurses in the next 10 years, fell apart when challenged with "yes, but, that 50K isn't 50K MORE is it? You are only saying you are going to get 31K MORE NEW nurses and the other 19K are already NHS nurses and you HOPE to persuade them not to leave........ so that isn't 50K MORE, now is it?
She tied herself in absolute knots claiming it WAS 50K MORE........ and they say Abbott aint very good with numbers ;)
In which case it’s the practice, not the principle, that needs changing Geoff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone
I’m not sure you’re entirely right that ‘public services do not improve as taxes go up’, but I take your point that such money is sometimes wrongly and wastefully directed and that then is what needs to change.
We need, imo, to ‘plug the loopholes’ MA refers to and use such money wisely to improve v1tal public services in a manner which benefits those it is aimed at rather than just creating another level of bureaucracy with more office staff but fewer teachers, nurses at the Royal Derby having an exposed fifteen minute walk from their cars to the actual hospital and some towns in Derbyshire having virtually no police presence from nearer than 15-20 miles away.
Maybe we should have a Referendum on how the spending of public money should be best prioritised.;D
At least Joe Public might be better informed on that subject.
Tend to agree with that, but people having to walk 15 minutes to work is no big deal, I spent years doing that.
What should we therefore spend the money on, or perhaps what should we not?
IMHO
NOT SPEND ANY MONEY ON:
Foreign Aid
Defence and military
Long term unemployment benefits et al (except disability payments)
SPEND MORE MONEY ON:
Health care, but not just giving big pay increases to staff to buy them off
Policing, particularly in rural areas
Public transport infrastructure - moving towards a ban on use of cars (long term), again mainly in rural areas
Sorting out a proper agricultural and fisheries policy post CAP
Environmental "encouragements"
Primary education and up to 16 (not university)
Apprenticeship schemes - career focussed education and skills training
Introduce "compulsory voluntary" community work schemes for the unemployed - eg litter picking etc to justify/maintain payments and get an enhanced weekly amount if volunteer does longer hours
NOT SURE ABOUT
Pensions by and large pensioners are some of the best off on average, but at bottom end the basic rate needs lifting. Maybe taper off the state pension based on size of private / employment pensions
Social care, but also try to put this back on the family members and return to a more family based responsibility, not just shunt granny into a state home when she gets too old to be of use to you as a free childminder
So come on then, lets have ideas for what you want?
Personally I think we need to throw away the rule book on how we deal with the "weak" in society and make the families more responsible. Obviously those without any living family would have to be state responsibility, but giving family members a small financial incentive to "do the decent thing" might be better than having billions of social and care workers.
I could ramble at length about how contemporary society is not meeting its obligations to one another either in a family unit or across the board. Double working families creating a huge need for child care and also elderly care: its a vicious circle as you need two working incomes to pay for the child/elderly care which increases the need for that care. Many of the care workers are migrants and on minimum wage (or less), work long anti social hours etc, yet these are the people who society entrusts the care of our most vulnerable family members. The answer is not to throw more money at them, it is for the families to act with more responsibility and respect to their own kin
Fascinating GP...some real food for thought there and a couple of cans of worms too.
You’re a real contradiction aren’t you? Of compassion and cruelty...naivety and ruthlessness. Interesting.
I accept the fifteen minute walk thing is a bit of a red herring. I’m not talking a fifteen minute stroll through leafy streets here though...I’m referring to a trek through a poorly lit and slightly intimidating semi derelict landscape that I’m told our largely female nursing staff have to do twice daily between vehicle and place of work. Not the best beginning and end to a day for those with such an important job imo.
I’m never sure why targeting ‘Foreign Aid’ seems so popular. Just seems like the equivalent of giving to charity to me. A tiny amount, relatively speaking, which is an example of the rich giving to the poor although I do accept it could often be targeted better.
Understand your take on cars and public transport but it isn’t going to happen any time soon. That particular genie is well and truly out of the bottle and the future is electric/hydrogen rather than fully ‘public’ in my, uninformed, opinion.
Your take on pensions I have some sympathy with...the family winter fuel credit - regardless of income level/need - being a classic example of unnecessary wastefulness built on greed, but I think your take on family responsibility is amazingly naive.
Seems to be something they’re much better at elsewhere in the world but if you’d worked with some of the families I have I think you’d have a different opinion.
Foreign aid is OK where needed but I can't for the life of me can't think why we should give to the likes of India and Pakistan who have their own nuclear and space programmes.........
Agreed MA, there are anomalies like that...but again it’s about practice rather than principle imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadAmster
As a nation I think we like to think how generous we are but I’m not entirely sure it’s true.
All nations agreed at the UN to pay out 0.7% of GDP on foreign aid. I may be wrong but I think that the UK and the Netherlands are the only 2 western countries that consistently hit that figure.Quote:
Originally Posted by ramAnag
Amazingly naive, rA? Tell me more....
I look at Indian and other Asian immigrant groups, West African groups etc and I see an exceptional degree of family loyalty and commitment to look after one another, generation by generation. Its good to see. The basic white English populace seem to have somewhat cynically divorced themselves from any responsibility for their family or extended family, preferring instead to maximise earnings and leave their "duty" to children or the elderly in the hands of others.
Now I fully accept that in a minority of cases, the child or the elderly may well be better off in a care system, but to me (maybe naively?) a lot of those dumped into care (private or public) are so dumped due to your much vilified greed: mostly where couples prefer to both work rather than looking after their own.
Put bluntly, why should I, via the public purse, pay to look after someone else's parent or child while they go off maximising their personal wealth rather than doing it?