Hey folks have a listen to this, this will want you to join the Junior Doctors Strike:
Recently the establishment decided to curb charity organisations from using funds they received in the form of grants whilst I have always highlighted this in the public domain and I agree with the sentiment somehow I can’t help but feel this government has a hidden agenda. Ah do I hear people saying. Yes you are reading correct the establishment has got it partly right they do need to close the loopholes from some charities abusing their funding. How do you distinguish which is private funds from private organisations that is the question.
The Tories are using the Trade Union Bill to try and break our relationship. Hidden in the Trade Union Bill is a clause that is deliberately designed to restrict trade unions supporting the Labour Party financially – while doing nothing to limit the hedge funds and millionaires that support the Tories.
The union activists who set up the Labour Party all those years ago did so to ensure working people had a voice in Parliament. The Tories are trying to silence that voice. The Bill is not just an attack on the relationship between the unions and the Labour Party, but it’s an attack on our democracy.
Just like those activists in 1901, we have to pull together as working people to protect our voice in politics. That’s why we’re asking if you could take two minutes to sign and share the petition against the Bill –
Well it’s not surprising from this government that they want to curb trade union funds which has been on the cards for a long time coming. Even during the Thatcher years there were talks of this happening ever since the miners’ strike which was but on the back burner then it came back to life again from 2010-16 under the Conservative coalition and a Conservative Government does this have a familiar echo within the trade union movement.
Now the establishment wants to subsidised rents for households earning more than £30,000, or £40,000 in London, will be scrapped in April 2017.
Social housing tenants will be asked to pay rent at or near market rates.
Ministers say it “better reflects people’s ability to pay” – but Labour and the Local Government Association say it would hit hard-working families.
The department for communities and local government argues that is “not fair that hard-working people are subsidising the lifestyles of those on higher than average incomes, to the tune of £3,500 per year”.
Housing Minister Brandon Lewis said people who could afford to pay more in rent “should do so” – but it would be graded, so that those on lower incomes would not have to pay full market rates.
“We have always said we would consider carefully how much more people pay as they move through the pay scales, once they get over £30,000,” he told BBC Radio 5 live’s Pienaar’s Politics.
He said the government would “listen to what comes in before we make a final decision in the period ahead of us”.
According to the LGA-commissioned study, almost 60,000 households in England will not be able to afford to pay rents at the market rate or take advantage of the right to buy.
Councillor Peter Box, housing spokesman at the LGA, which represents hundreds of local councils in England, said: “Many social housing tenants across the country will be unable to afford market rents or take up the offer to buy their council home under this policy.
“A couple with three children, earning £15,000 each a year, cannot be defined as high income. Pay to stay needs to be voluntary for councils – as it will be for housing associations.
“This flexibility is essential to allow us to protect social housing tenants and avoid the unintended consequence of hard-working families being penalised, people being disincentivised to work and earn more and key workers, such as nurses, teachers or social workers, having to move out of their local area.”
The LGA figures, compiled by the estate agent Savills, show that almost 215,000 social housing tenants will be affected by the “pay to stay” policy.
The policy is expected to save £245m a year by 2019-20, ending a situation where higher-income social tenants benefit from taxpayer-funded subsidies of up to £3,500 per year.
Former head of the civil service, Lord Kerslake, now a crossbench peer, will attempt to amend the housing bill, which is being scrutinised next week in the House of Lords, to place the scheme at the discretion of local authorities.
The peer, who is now chairman of the Peabody Trust housing association, has warned that the proposals were part of a package that could “threaten the future of social housing”.
“When this was originally discussed in the coalition government, it was intended to deal with the very small number of high earners on over £60,000.
“The current proposals will affect a lot more households with earnings of half that.”
Well it likes the Tories out to get David Cameron between the legs and it seems that Tory MP David Davis said news of the proposed in-work benefits ban could encourage workers to head to the UK.
Sir Eric Pickles, a Eurosceptic who supports Mr Cameron’s reform proposals, said action had to be taken to prevent a “new influx” of migrants.
The ban has to be agreed by all EU nations at a summit on 18 February.
It will be graduated, so that the longer migrant workers stay in the UK, the more in-work benefits, such as tax credits, they will be entitled to, in order to top-up their wages. Mr Cameron says the move will “make a difference” to high levels of immigration by reducing a “pull factor”.
But it will have to be agreed by member states, as part of a wider package of reforms to Britain’s relationship with the EU, and will only apply for a temporary period as an “emergency brake”.
If Mr Cameron can get a deal on his reform package in two weeks’ time at the Brussels summit he is expected to call a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU in June.
David Davis, a former Tory leadership contender and leading Eurosceptic, said eastern European newspapers had carried numerous stories about the plan to terminate in-work benefits for the first four years after a migrant’s arrival in the UK.
At the same time, he said, Brussels has suggested the scheme could take 12 months to implement.
“Under such circumstances the incentive for anybody wishing to come to live in the UK will be to come as quickly as possible to beat the deadline when any such restrictions come into effect,” he said.
“Accordingly we are likely to see a surge in migrants in the next 12 months.”
Mr Cameron has suggested the “emergency brake” could come into effect within three months of the UK applying for it.
Eric Pickles defended Mr Cameron’s reform deal, on the BBC’s Sunday Politics, saying: “What we need to be clear is, we’re not trying to prevent people moving inside the European Union.”
The reforms were instead aimed at preventing people gaining “something for nothing” by claiming UK benefits before contributing anything in tax.
But Sir Eric. a Conservative former cabinet minister, said action was needed to prevent a surge of migrants: “Clearly as part of the negotiations we have to ensure that that doesn’t happen.” Meanwhile, speculation is continuing about whether a big cabinet name will lead the campaign to take Britain out of the EU. Other potential Tory “outers” include Justice Secretary Michael Gove and Employment Minister Priti Patel, who have said they will make their position clear when they have seen the final deal.
The hot potato of the day was on Sunday 7 February 2016 on the BBC Andrew Marr Show I did not know whether to laugh, cry or bang my head on the wall like many of the junior doctors when Jeremy Hunt quote that the British Medical Association(BMA) of being “totally irresponsible” over a lengthy industrial dispute. The doctors union had refused to sit down and talk about improving patient care and had spread “misinformation”.
Okay now that I’ve got this out of the way, I say what a load of poppycock or what a load of pile of manure coming out of his mouth. No doubt he is promoting a great message by using spin doctoring to put patents lives at risk and he think we were all born yesterday thinking we all will believe him when he says that hospitals should be open 24/7. Er we all know that hospitals are open seven days a week all year round. Don’t be taken in by this spin doctoring by Jeremy Hunt.
Well Jeremy Hunt to put it in a nutshell it’s okay to put health workers lives in danger by this he pointed the finger at the BMA for the breakdown in negotiations, sticking to the mantra of blaming patient deaths on NHS “inefficiencies,” rather than on the cuts and the need for more doctors and NHS staff — but at the same time he announced some shiny new baubles.
Hunt has continually misrepresented independent studies to claim that the 11,000 extra deaths per year over weekends compared to weekdays is as a result of a “five-day” service and the existence of “excessive overtime rates.”
On the Andrew Marr show he managed to twice misquote the contents of the report while trying to claim he hadn’t been misrepresenting it.
“If the government want more seven-day services then, quite simply, they need more doctors, nurses and diagnostic staff, and the extra investment needed to deliver it,” the BMA retorted correctly.
“Rather than addressing these issues, Jeremy Hunt is instead ploughing ahead with proposals that are unfair and could see many junior doctors voting with their feet.”
The cornerstone of his new strategy appears to be the announcement of a fresh round of investment into upgrading and “modernising” the NHS’s IT infrastructure.
Workers are well inoculated to “modernisation” programmes being used as cover for a fresh round of public money being forked over to the usual rogues’ gallery of privateers — an alarming number of which have former government ministers on their boards.
But the potential for abuse and massive waste of expenditure without any substantial improvements is rife, particularly if it’s left to the usual PFI which was introduce by the Conservatives in 1992 under John Major or PF2 as the government has now rebranded them contractors to deliver.
When the Labour Government came to power in 1997 it continued with the Tory’s PFI project NHS programme for IT provides a stark example. It took nearly seven years to complete at a cost of an estimated £10 billion most of which was pocketed by IT companies and PFI specialists before finally being abandoned.
But the Tories themselves already have form in this particular area. Under the coalition government, they attempted to introduce their own version of the NHS programme for IT in 2013.
The then health secretary claimed that the goal was to “go paperless across the NHS by 2018.”
The first element of this, the care.data project which aimed at creating a national database of health records that could be shared across the NHS in England, was quietly dropped in the run-up to the last general election after two years of failing to address critical concerns of campaigners and health professionals.
It was their steadfast refusal to drop the selling of this information on to the private sector that killed off this potentially life-saving project.
Lest we forget, the then health secretary in 2013 is the same as the current one — Jeremy Hunt.
But perhaps poor old Jeremy is suffering from a dose of selective amnesia due to the strain he’s been put under over the last few months and forgotten this.
Selected patient information is already made available to certain private medical research companies through the Health and Social Care Information Centre by many NHS trusts, raising questions about data security.
Aggregating of information and data mining have become a booming international market worth billions. And these are far from shadowy companies operating on the fringes of legality. One of the most notorious British-based data miners, Dunnhumby, is owned by Tesco.
The Tories’ unswerving commitment to the neoliberal mantra of “private good, public bad” will ensure that this latest programme is doomed before it begins.
Now that I have got all this my chest i urge all to join the Junior Doctors strike on 10 Feb 2016.