The Tory way of governance

www.independent.co.uk/voices/housing-benefit-under-22-young-people-cut-theresa-may-save-money-ideological-cruel-a7612321.html

www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/05/housing-benefit-cap-forcing-families-homelessness

She was concerned about youngsters being able to have a home. If they cannot live with their parents, they could end up homeless, as they are not entitled to housing benefit.
How can they even start to save towards a deposit if they cannot claim housing benefit whatever their circumstances.
It applies to all those under 21 going on UC, which means all those on low pay anyway. She said she was on the side of those born into poverty. This is how she shows it?

Why is the housing benefit issue for 18-21 year olds a U-turn? It's disgraceful, but it was in the 2015 manifesto. People voted for it.

Her speech 8 months ago consisted of weasel words - she didn't promise anything.

I bet this book by some Conservative MPs, published in 2012, wasn't a best seller:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19300051

Apparently British workers "are among the worst idlers in the world". They claim that the EU stops bosses making workers work longer hours. Hmm! Funny that didn't come up in the 2015 manifesto.

Do you think May will take any notice of Gove?

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/04/brexit-campaigners-theresa-may-guarantee-eu-citizens-rights

www.indy100.com/article/warnings-homeless-charities-government-housing-benefit-cuts-young-people-7611016

Another u-turn on her Downing Street statement.

Everything on the table? They forgot to tell the Department of Health spokesperson.

There is an article in the Economist (March 4 -10) which talks about the NHS and says there is "little dispute about the present system's dire condition" and that Mays government has three possible choices, having already raided the separate capital budget for long-term investment moving £950m into its revenue budget in 2015-2016 which they say they will probably have to do again. The three long-term possibilities are:

Put in more cash. As a percentage of GDP spending on the NHS has been falling steadily since 2010. Mr Hammond has repeatedly said there is no new money available so may find this difficult.

The second suggestion they give is to promote new models of care in the NHS using the STPs that are being drawn up. The article points out that recent reports say that these lack executive authority, a constant vision and would need pooled budgets commissioned by a single body.

The article sees the last suggested solution is the most controversial - raising more money by either a social insurance system or inheritance levy. It draws on the German example of deduction from pay or, thinking of the young, without houses or pensions, a levy on estates worth over a certain amount.

It points out that everything is on the table currently and suggests the government is prepared to think the unthinkable - we shall soon see.

Petra when going into a negotiation in which you are hoping for a win-win outcome it is never a good idea to antagonise your opponent and always a good idea to build those positive vibes. The starting point for the UK is not good - why would the other governments be seriously peed off with us and the leaders that caused this state of affairs.
Heading for a lose-lose at the moment.

Maybe the Tories don't need any more kudos?

' The Department of Health insists that its plans will help sustain the NHS for future generations, with a spokesperson saying: “We are committed to the NHS which is why we’re investing £10bn in its own plan for the future, including £4bn extra this year to transform services and improve standards of care.” '

What did they miss out of this?
How long have they been saying it?
How many times have they been told they are lying?
They must have very selective hearing.

250,000 said to be on the march for the NHS today.
Will the Tories take any notice?

inews.co.uk/essentials/news/health/nhs-march-placards-cuts-london-corbyn/

Obviously the sort of news that it's unhealthy for us to read, but it's more unhealthy for the children of Calais.

Why do the Tories not see that they would get some kudos for sorting this out, and for allowing the EU citizens who have been living here to stay?

May already has the backing of every brexiteer. If she wants the backing of the remain group, it's easy to get just by being a bit conciliatory.

I saw that headline yesterday but did not read the article. For a month or so many children who have gradually gone back to Calais are sleeping outside the town in wood and scrubland. The volunteers have been going around in the dark looking for them and distributing clothing and blankets etc and some food but of course it cannot be the hot meals they were giving previously.

inews.co.uk/essentials/news/banning-food-distribution-calais-gifting-unattended-children-traffickers/

Just been reading this. Yes, it's in France, but they've gone back to Calais because of the Tories washing their hands of the problem.

Thanks for putting the speech up Jen.

Next week, the Chancellor will stand up in Parliament to deliver his first – and last – spring Budget.
He will no doubt want to paint a rosy picture of progress since the Autumn Statement, just a few months ago.
But if progress has been so significant, and all is going so well – why is the government continuing to pursue spending cuts?
From the NHS to social care, from prisons to education, our public services are in crisis.

Good question - where is the Tory answer?

Tories reassuming the nasty party mantle.

www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/03/bereavement-benefits-cut-to-help-people-readjust-to-life-as-single-parents

Quite incredible reasoning.

www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/canada-is-giving-a-home-to-1200-yazidi-refugees/

Another reason to feel ashamed of the government.

whitewave, that's the key point, that the image is of a real child, who was being abused so yes, the individual looking at that image is contributing to that abuse. As for your question about the extent of abuse of children, it's always been significant in all societies. I suspect that the easy access to images of that kind of abuse on line, along with ease of access to various types of pornography will lead to an increase in the sexual abuse of children and of adult sexual partners.
Men (and women) who access images of children being abused do so because they find it sexually arousing. Once images have been viewed, it's more than possible that the excitement gained needs to increase so more depraved images are viewed and the perpetrator my find his/her people out their on the dark web or they may find children in their family or friendship circle are easy to draw into sexual behaviour which escalates along with the child's fear of telling anyone.

The police officer was, if I understood him properly, suggesting that a risk assessment would determine whether someone looking at images posed an immediate risk to children, what the level of that risk developing was etc. I have friends who work with perpetrators, I worked with victims/survivors. I am not enthusiastic about current perpetrator programmes because I believe that one's sexual interest tends to be fixed.

The point is I can't see how the police officer can say that where the idiot is just looking but not touching there is less risk. What about the child being looked at, isn't he/she a victim?

Probably always been there whitewave. The only thing that has changed is the internet and the easy availability of visual images.
Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry VII was married off to an older man at 12 and gave birth to Henry at 13.
And it's only about 150 years since boys and men were imprisoned together... back in the time of Great Expectations.

labourlist.org/2017/03/mcdonnell-the-nhs-is-in-a-state-of-profound-crisis-because-the-tories-ignore-it/

The speech.

With the Tories budget next week I thought it would be good to see John McDonnell's speech today but I cannot find any of it except on Facebook however the questions asked afterwards are here

If you go to the Labour FB page you can see the speech.

What I can't get my mind around is the level of paedophilia in the country. What on earth has happened???