The future of Government (if any)

[Alan H]

Latest post of the previous page:

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Two Tory MPs reveal CPS is reviewing their election spending

Karl McCartney and William Wragg among more than 20 Conservative MPs facing allegations of electoral fraud

[Alan H]

'Lack of money' prompts care firms to end council contracts

Care firms have cancelled contracts with 95 UK councils, saying they cannot deliver services for the amount they are being paid, a BBC Panorama investigation has found.

Some firms said they could not recruit or retain the staff they needed.

The Local Government Association said it was the result of "historic under-funding" and an ageing population.

[Alan H]

The inside story of the Tory election scandal

The unexpected Conservative election victory of 2015 transformed British politics. Now an unprecedented Electoral Commission investigation has raised the question of whether it was even a fair fight.

[Alan H]

George Osborne's benefit cuts legacy set to come into effect

New benefit cuts that could cost the hardest-hit single parents more than £6,000 by 2019 are set to come into force next week, a hangover from the chancellorship of George Osborne, who was sacked by Theresa May last July after the EU referendum.

The changes coming into force on 5 April include limiting the child element of support to the first two children and removing the family element of support for new claimants of tax credit and universal credit, meaning families will start to be affected from 2019 onwards.

Another controversial change is a cut to the employment and support allowance – a disability benefit – for new claimants deemed capable of some work-related activity. From that date, they will only be eligible for the £73.10 a week paid to recipients of jobseeker’s allowance.

The shadow work and pensions secretary, Debbie Abrahams, said the changes, which include limits on child benefit and cuts to universal credit, would put a “terrible toll upon families across the UK”.

A single mother with three children, who makes a universal credit claim after the rules come into effect, would stand to lose £6,195 by 2019 compared with the current rules, according to House of Commons library figures. The cut is a consequence of the new two-child cap in benefit support along with the removal of the “first-child premium” for new claims and cuts to the work allowance.

Single parents who are already claiming universal credit stand to lose £5,669 by 2019 if they have a third child after the new rules come into force.

Abrahams said: “[The cuts will] hit working families, young people, disabled people and children coping with the loss of a parent, ensuring it is even harder for them to make ends meet.

[Alan H]

Changes to Universal Credit will push 200,000 children below poverty line, report warns

[Alan H]

MOTHERS MUST PROVE THEY WERE RAPED TO GET BENEFITS

From 6 April 2017 the Government will make mothers prove they were raped or sexually abused to get benefits for a third child.

Rape will be the main exception from the UK's two child policy which now applies to low income families who claim tax credits, universal credit, or housing benefit. It will also apply in some areas for council tax support or reduction. In general there will be no extra money for a third or subsequent child born from 6 April 2017. That will apply to new claims and existing claimants.

But we're all in it together, aren't we?

Child benefit

These intrusive questions and complex rules will not apply to better off parents who claim child benefit where the means test starts much higher – at £50,000. Those parents will continue to get money for every child including those born from 6 April 2017.

But just try to imagine filling this in:

Screenshot from 2017-04-06.png (406.46 KiB) Viewed 2819 times

You don't get money if you're still living with the man who raped you.

[Alan H]

“For the UK Government, some children appear to matter more than others”— Commissioner blogs on new benefit cuts

This Thursday, benefit cuts brought in by former Chancellor George Osborne will start to take effect— and they will hit the poorest families hardest.

The changes form part of a £12 billion programme of social security cuts expected to save £1 billion a year by 2021. As the Resolution Foundation notes:

“The overall package amounts to a £1 billion net giveaway from the public purse. But the skewed nature of this generosity means that better-off households will receive four-fifths of the gains, while the poorest third of households will be worse off overall.”

For the UK Government, some children appear to matter more than others.

The rights of children affected by these benefit cuts appear to have been given little consideration at all.

[Alan H]

Philip Hammond signals ditching of Tory 'no tax rise' pledge

[Alan H]

When did Cameron and may say they would have scrapped the HRA? It was a big Tory promise, wasn't it? Britain to be bound by European Convention on Human Rights until 2022 (£)

Britain will be bound by European human rights laws for another five years with the Conservatives expected to abandon a pledge to withdraw the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights.

Theresa May, who served as home secretary from 2010 to 2016, said last year she wanted to quit the ECHR, which for a time frustrated her plans to extradite the hate preacher Abu Qatada.

Mrs May was expected to write the commitment into the Conservative manifesto meaning that Britain would be committed to withdrawing by the end of the next parliament, in 2022.

However senior Government figures have told The Telegraph they expect Mrs May to drop the commitment because it would be a major distraction for her Government from the Brexit negotiations.

It means that Britain is now likely to be bound by European human rights laws for at least another five years.

The news came as:...

[Alan H]

'Downward spiral': UK slips to 40th place in press freedom rankings

[Alan H]

Listen to @ProfKEPickett as she tears apart Tory welfare reforms explaining what damage it is doing to poor, sick & disabled people

"What we are seeing as a consequence of welfare reform is rising child poverty... rising infant mortality for the first time in decades.. and we're seeing a rise in deaths among the frail elderly... "

[Alan H]

Strange times: General election 2017: Tories vow to end 'rip-off' energy bills

Theresa May has vowed to end the "injustice" of rising energy costs by promising a cap on standard variable tariffs in the Tory election manifesto.

The PM said the energy market "is not working", with vulnerable people worst hit by "rip-off" bills.

Industry figures have criticised the plan, first announced last month, saying it could lead to higher prices.

[stevenw888]

Can't see any posts on here about Diane Abbott's hilarious abortive attempts to get her facts right on a radio programme last week. Has it all become rather one-sided whilst I've been away? where's Nick?

[Alan H]

Britain's Poorest Households Pay More Of Their Income in Tax Than The Richest

Britain's poorest households pay a greater proportion of their income in taxes than the richest, according to new data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Analysis of the ONS' Effects of Taxes and Benefits publication, released today, found:

The poorest 10% of households paid on average 42% of their income in tax in 2015/16.
The richest 10% of households however paid on average just 34.3% of their income in tax
Council tax and VAT hit the poorest particularly hard, with the poorest 10% of households paying 7% of their gross income in council tax, compared to just 1.5% for the richest, and 12.5% of gross income paid in VAT (5% for rich)
Despite paying far less of their income in tax, the richest 10% have on average a gross income of £110,632, 10 times that of the poorest (£10,992)
Post tax (including direct and indirect taxes and cash benefits) the poorest 10% have on average £6,370 and the richest 10% have £72,746

[Nick]

where's Nick?

Lurking!

[animist]

Can't see any posts on here about Diane Abbott's hilarious abortive attempts to get her facts right on a radio programme last week. Has it all become rather one-sided whilst I've been away? where's Nick?

"rather" one-sided? You seriously overestimate Labour's current performance. I blame some of the shambles on Brexit, but just think - if Labour had been smart enough to choose the more handsome Miliband brother, it could all have been different . Glad to have you back, and where have you been?

[Alan H]

Myth-busting the “Tory election fraud” – A 10-point guide

[Nick]

Myth-busting the “Tory election fraud” – A 10-point guide

From the article, all you need to know:

There is no evidence at all to reasonably support the claim that the CPS have reached the wrong decision

Now then, Labour have also been fined for electoral irregularities. Funny you never mentioned it, Alan....

[Alan H]

Myth-busting the “Tory election fraud” – A 10-point guide

From the article, all you need to know:

There is no evidence at all to reasonably support the claim that the CPS have reached the wrong decision

[stevenw888]

I'm afraid I don't understand how it was possible for Theresa May to begin the process of calling for an election on 8th June 2017. In 2010, as part of the coalition agreement, parliament passed an Act called the Fixed Term Parliament Act, which stated that any elected government would run for precisely five years and that no Prime Minister would be able to call for an early election just because he or she figured that an early election would enable his or her party to stand a better chance of winning. That seems to be exactly what has happened. May has called for an election 3 years early because she knows damn well she will win. Surely that's exactly what the Act was designed to stop. Therefore I question the legality of this forthcoming election.

[Alan H]

I'm afraid I don't understand how it was possible for Theresa May to begin the process of calling for an election on 8th June 2017. In 2010, as part of the coalition agreement, parliament passed an Act called the Fixed Term Parliament Act, which stated that any elected government would run for precisely five years and that no Prime Minister would be able to call for an early election just because he or she figured that an early election would enable his or her party to stand a better chance of winning. That seems to be exactly what has happened. May has called for an election 3 years early because she knows damn well she will win. Surely that's exactly what the Act was designed to stop. Therefore I question the legality of this forthcoming election.

The get-out clause was the one that said fixed terms could be ignored and a GE called if 2/3 of Parliament agreed. Labour duly entered the lobby with the Tories and hey presto, we have a GE.