Budget

Jalima1108, surely the concern is with European nationals coming to Britain under the free movement of labour. With Brexit that uncontrolled migration should cease or be very much reduced. However, immigration from countries outside the EU will be exactly the same at it is now unaffected by Brexit.

The above is why I posted the European nationals only figures in the prison population.

The prison population has gone down over the last 12 months by about 3,000.

Check out French prisons if you want some worrying statistics (not on numbers, on demographic).

you said EU, I did not.

Oh, how odd Grandad

The official figure was 9,300 from 162 different countries in March 2018.

Jalima1108 Quote[A very high percentage of the UK prison population is from overseas, including many from Europe.]End quote

Jalima1108, In regard to your above post, at the end of 2017 there were just over 4,000 EU nationals in prisons in England and Wales. That’s around 5% of the overall prison population—the same proportion as for the last five years. The total number of EU prisoners dropped by around 100 in 2017 compared to the year before.

Full details on overseas nationals in UK prisons can be found by following this link:-https://fullfact.org/crime/eu-prisoners/

How high a percentage, Jalima?

UK prison population is biggest in western Europe
Careful varian, you could have posted an own goal there.

A very high percentage of the UK prison population is from overseas, including many from Europe.

Over generous to higher rate tax payers, maybe, Nonnie, but I fail to see any other 'generosity'.

All in all it seems a bit neutral to me.

In spite of the crass comments by MPs business relief on toilet blocks was very welcome. Now perhaps there will be fewer closures and we will have more options for going out and about and visiting places.

No one seems to have mentioned that the IFS/OBR (can't remember which) has said the budget may have been over generous!

gilly I don't think our local council could be described as one of the richer ones, it was in a rural area so didn't get the extra funding larger conurbations get. I think they were simply sensible in their approach of a 'a stitch in time saves 9'. In this way they dealt with the roads while the problems were small instead of waiting until they became very costly to deal with.

UK prison population is biggest in western Europe

www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/08/uk-prison-population-is-biggest-in-western-europe

I think it was a very good budget on the whole. Of course we all have our own ideas about how the available money should be distributed.

I would like to have seen more going to the police. We are getting very close to the situation (if not there already) where criminals have nothing to fear from the justice system. When that happens, well God help us.

We are told prisons are full - well, build more prisons.

Far too few politicians have any real experience of life at the sharp end, for folk like gillybob, running a small business, for sick and disabled folk suffering loss of support because of Universal Credit, for conscientious public servants trying to run schools, hospitals or prisons.

Our poor economic performance, relative to other G7 countries, since 2016 has made things so much worse.

fullfact.org/economy/uk-economic-growth-within-g7/

This “mandatory” pension inflicted on all businesses makes me sick ! As a small business we already pay huge employers NI contributions but are now forced to pay pension “ top ups “ that I suspect will be worthless when the employee eventually retires .

Back to the Budget.

It appears that those tax cuts aren't quite as generous as at first believed.

This from the Daily Telegraph daily briefing email:

– Tax cut? What tax cut? –

First, a combing of the small print revealed that, while income tax thresholds are rising, so too is the drop-off point for National Insurance (from 12 per cent to 2 per cent). That’s less of an issue when it comes to increasing personal allowance. But for higher-rate payers, it means their potential savings could drop from £860 a year to £520.

The move is based on a similar logic to the income tax cuts. While inflation and wage rises drag “ordinary people” into the higher rate who it was never intended for (nurses and policemen are the favoured examples), they also push people out of the NI rate they weren’t meant to leave.

But Treasury logic and good politics rarely overlap, and the failure of the Chancellor to even mention the NI rise in his speech has opened him up to accusations of pushing a stealth tax.

Meanwhile, a significant number of moderate earners will actually see their take-home pay decrease. Mandatory pension contributions have gone up from 3 per cent to 5 per cent, so while assets will be more substantial (the employer contribution will also increase), many workers will actually have less money in their accounts on payday

So even some of the rightwing press are sceptical.

MaizieD I totally agree with your post.

I am off to the gym and shall contemplate what you have said, hopefully it will take my mind off the exercises that I do not like ????

My conclusion is that I like many use the phrase "nanny state" without actually thinking it through.

I think that people often use the phrase in conjunction with legislation that they don't like

However, I think there is always a tension between what is reasonable for the protection of the state's citizens and what is an intolerable infringement of personal liberty.

It is sobering to look at the protections we have in law that we take absolutely for granted, and, for the most part, are grateful for, and to realise that they would have been objected to when first proposed on the grounds of infringement of personal liberty (I remember huge objections to the seatbelt legislation).

The big question is,at what point does it cease to be protection and becomes an imposition on liberty?

MaizieD, good points, you have really got my brain working this morning ???

We had the first nonsmoking gastro pub in the country just up the road many years before the law came in.

Seat belts, qualifications for teachers, nurses, doctors should be globally high and monitored, I would go as far as if a teacher, nurse etc. from UK wanted to work in another country they should have to pass a skills and language test and vice versa.

Planning very contentious, a large multi national building firm has been trying to get planning permission to build on a local farm, we have campaigned against it because it is on the flood plain of the Thames Estuary. It was denied, they appealed to central government and we are awaiting the answer. Local Councils/Councillors know the area, they are better placed to make these decisions.

Health & Safety legislation has saved lives.

My conclusion is that I like many use the phrase "nanny state" without actually thinking it through.

Thank you for at least answering, GG

I'd be interested to know what you think constitutes state nannying.

What about seatbelt legislation, smoking ban, food hygiene regulations, food standards, proper qualifications for teachers, doctors, nurses etc, health and safety legislation, building regulations, town planning, NHS free at point of use and many, many more.... Are these 'nannying'? After all, none of them were in effect 100+ years ago and people survived .

MaizieD- I want a government that helps people to help themselves.

I do not want an omnipresent government that nationalises every consievable utility/service at a cost of billions. I do not want to live in a "nanny state"

I want a government to realise that in primary education we need to go back to the basics, and not try to be all things to everyone.

I might add that the only utilities which I think should not have been nationalised are the water companies.

gillybob- flipping bus lanes, we have 2 on our A road that even the bus companies do not use!!! They are for approx 1/2 mile each, on a stretch of road where it is easy to overtake. Totally ridiculous ????

MaizieD please do not make assumptions about what I mean in my posts.

Once your post is on the forum, nonnie, people will interpret it in ways that might surprise you.

I still fail to see why you should differentiate between 'political' and 'what people think'. 'What people think' is usually driven by their political views. If I make a 'political' comment it's because that's what I think. I don't see how it can be anything other than that.

I'm surprised that not everyone understands that politicians will do what they need to to please as many people as possible, not necessarily helping minorities who need more help

It doesn't surprise me in the slightest. The tories were hoping to gain voters from their budget. They have shown time and time again that they don't have an interest in minorities that need more help.

"Is this what people want from their government?" is the question I asked. So far, no answers

I agree with you GrannyGravy but I’m honestly not sure what our council spends it’s money on anymore, other than bus lanes which they seem to be obsessed with. Our rates and council taxes are some of the highest in the country.

gillybob I think councils have a difficult decision on where to spend the money. We have potholes, some massive, but we still have our surestart centre and 2 libraries in our village/very small town.

Potholes are a pain but we would rather have them than lose amenities.