30th April 2015

Tendring Topics…….on line

The Day of Reckoning

          When this blog is published the General Election will be only a few days away.   It is possible that by the time I prepare another blog we will know the composition of the next government.   Do you remember the situation just before last year’s Scottish referendum?  Scottish public opinion polls showed the YES and NO campaigns to be very close. There was a distinct possibility that the YES vote would triumph.  That, decided the leaders of the three main political parties, had to be prevented at all costs.  In a rare spirit of co-operation they published  a joint promise that if the NO voters comprised a majority the Scots would be offered virtually everything they asked for short of complete independence and the break-up of the United Kingdom.   And of course, the NO campaign was successful.

            I think that we have reached a similar point in the General Election campaign. Opinion polls show that the Labour and Conservative Parties are neck and neck and the leaders are resorting to desperate measures to attract voters.   David Cameron has promised that if a Conservative Government is elected, there will be no increase in either the standard or the higher rate of income tax, or in the rate of VAT, or in National Insurance contributions (three principal sources of Government finance) for the government’s period of office – the next five years.  To make certain that that promise is honoured the government will introduce a bill to Parliament giving that promise the force of law.  The only possible reason why a government should introduce and support a law limiting its own powers must surely be that top politicians now realize the electorate doesn’t believe a word that any of them say.   David Cameron imagines that enshrining it in law will assure electors that that particular promise will be kept.  It still may not be, of course.  Parliament can pass a law and parliament can repeal that same law if it wishes to do so.  I have no doubt that if circumstances demanded, the government would break that promise quickly enough, as it has others.

            This generosity of the government to those of us fortunate enough to be liable for income tax will be funded by further cuts in government grants to local authorities and to welfare and public services.   David Cameron and George Osborne have so far declined to tell us who will suffer.  I am always amused when David Cameron speaks of the wealthy having worked hard and saved to acquire their millions for the purchase of their yachts, their British football teams and their stately homes.  Can you imagine Russian oligarchs, made rich by President Yeltzin generosity to his pals, carefully putting their roubles into a saving bank until they had saved up enough to go to England and buy a thoroughly modernised castle and a professional football team?   I reckon that most, if not all, of Britain’s growing army of billionaires should put OBE (Other B………..s’ Efforts) after their names.

            The current big worry of English politicians is the intentions of the Scottish Nationalist MPs.  To their consternation the SNP didn’t wither and die when they lost that famous referendum.  On the contrary they grew in both membership and supporters so that, although the Liberal Democrats are regarded as the third ‘major party’ in UK politics, their place has in reality been taken by the SNP, despite the fact that their appeal is only to one region of the United Kingdom.  Their former leader Alex Salmond is now leader of the SNP members of the Westminster Parliament while his place as Leader of the party has been taken by Nicola Sturgeon – in my opinion the most articulate, confident and charismatic political leader in the United Kingdom today. 

            In Scotland the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Ukippers barely have a foothold.   It is expected that the SNP will take the place of Labour in dominating the Scottish political scene.  It is by no means impossible that there will be sufficient SNP MPs elected to prop up a minority Labour Government.  It’s a possibility that terrifies all the other party leaders including Ed Miliband, who has repeatedly declared that he would not enter into any kind of coalition or other voting pact with Alex Salmond and his merry men – and women!  A columnist in The Sun declared that a Labour pact with the SNP would be the first step on the path to a Communist Dictatorship! Goodness, I thought that I’d better check on what the SNP really does stand for - beyond independence for Scotland.  I have always found the web’s Wikipedia a very reliable source of information.  Here’s what they have to say about the SNP’s policies

The SNP's policy base is mostly in the mainstream European social democratic tradition. Among its policies are commitments to same-sex marriage, reducing the voting age to 16, unilateral nuclear disarmament,progressive personal taxation, the eradication of poverty, the building of affordable social housing, free higher education, opposition to the building of new nuclear power plants, investment in renewable energy, the abolition of Air Passenger Duty, and a pay increase for nurses

Apart from ‘same sex marriage and reducing the voting age to 16’ (public opinion has changed a great deal in the past seventy years!) those are much the same policies that I, and thousands of other ex-servicemen returning from World War II, thought we were voting for when we rejected the Conservatives and elected the Attlee Government in 1945.   I find it quite refreshing that the Scots have retained – or perhaps rediscovered – the idealism of the old Labour Party.  There’s certainly no sign of a communist dictatorship there.  I think that an alliance between the SNP and Labour would do nothing but good.

Much more sinister and – sadly – I think rather more likely, is the possibility of an alliance between the Conservative Party and UKIP to form a coalition government of Tories and Ukippers.  A great many well-to-the-right-of-the-party Conservative MPs are crypto-Ukippers and have refrained from taking the same path as Clacton’s turn-coat MP Douglas Carswell either from loyalty or after weighing up where their personal advantage lay.  I think that they would find Nigel Farage a much more charismatic and confident leader than David Cameron, and that it wouldn’t be long before the two parties merged with Farage on top!  Then I think we really would be on the way to a right-wing dictatorship, supported ideologically by the Murdoch press and financially by reactionary Republican supporters from across the Atlantic.

Possibly all this speculation about coalitions is pointless and either the Conservatives or Labour will get an overall majority of MPs.   I do urge every blog reader with a vote to use it on Thursday. If you are fed up with both the Tories and the Labourites –  remember that UKIP is not the only, or the best, alternative.  There is, I think, a Green Candidate in every constituency!

Week 8 2012 23.2.2012

Tendring Topics.....on Line

Where are we going?

          Did you know that we are all to be invited to take part in an election in November of this year?   It is to decide who, in the future, is to appoint Chief Constables and to have strategic control of the UK’s Police Force in our area.  I have to confess that I had only the vaguest idea of who exercises this control at the present time.  I did know that a relatively small proportion of our Council Tax payments is earmarked for the ‘Police Authority’ and, as Police Authority boundaries generally coincide with those of the county, I thought that the Police Authority must be something to do with the County Council.

            In fact, Police Authorities are quite separate organisations.  Typically they have seventeen members, nine of whom are nominees of the County and District Councils in their area and eight are ‘independent’ councillors, nominated by the Police Authority itself.  Of the independent councillors at least three must be Justices of the Peace.  I don’t think that anyone would claim that an organisation of which almost half its members are self-appointed could claim to be ‘democratic’.    Alternatives might be for all the members to be directly elected in the same way as councillors, or perhaps for them to be nominated by the county and district councils in the Police Area. Justices of the Peace in the area might be invited to elect their own three representatives on the Police Committee.

             Those however are not the choices that we shall be invited to make in November. The Government, which has abolished ‘committee control’ of local government and now requires local councils to have all-powerful elected Mayors (the preferred option) or ‘cabinet control’ by a small majority party clique, as in the central government in Westminster, is introducing an even more dictatorial system of control for Police Authorities.  Police Authorities will be abolished and replaced by an elected full-time Police Commissioner for each area who will appoint the Chief Constable, allocate funding, and decide on strategic police policy.  Candidates for these posts will not be required to have any previous police experience and political parties will probably put their own candidates forward.  I understand that the only party so far to have selected a candidate is UKIP – though I have just learned that Lord Prescott (former Deputy Prime Minister) hopes to be Labour’s candidate for South Humberside.  Oh yes – there is one requirement.  Each candidate will be required to find a £5,000 deposit to be forfeited if he or she doesn’t achieve a certain proportion of the total vote.

             The new idea may be more efficient than the present arrangement.  It may be less expensive – though that I doubt.  It will certainly be easier for central government to persuade one man (or woman) rather than a committee to toe the government line. It won’t be more democratic.  And all of this from a government that says it is promoting localism and power to the people! 

            Directly elected all-powerful Mayors! Directly elected all-powerful Police Commissioners!  Where are we going? Perhaps we should have a directly elected all-powerful Prime Minister.  He could be given a new title – National Leader perhaps?  I am old enough to remember that something of the sort was tried in mainland Europe during the last century – in Germany, Italy, Spain and the Soviet Union!

‘One Nation’ Conservatism?

          A few years ago I was amused when one Conservative MP told us proudly that to him ‘One Nation Conservatism’ meant keeping England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as one United Kingdom.  That isn’t its meaning of course.  It derives from a novel written by Benjamin Disraeli, the founder of the modern Conservative Party entitled Sybil or The Two Nations. In it he claimed that early Victorian Britain was not one nation but two – the rich and the poor; possibly not a message that today’s Conservatives want to hear.

            It is a novel remarkable for its realistic description of the living conditions of  working class people in England at that time; a description remarkably similar to that of Frederick Engels who, with Karl Marx, was a founder of the Communist Party, in his ‘Condition of the Working Classes in England in 1844’. The two books were published in the same year – 1845.

            I think it likely that David Cameron, despite his old Etonian background and his millionaire-packed government, would claim to be a ‘One Nation Conservative’.  He genuinely believes that he speaks and acts for the welfare of the whole population of the UK, rich and poor alike.  Of the current financial crisis he claims ‘We’re all in this together’.

 That is something that many would question.    I don’t think though that anyone would doubt his devotion to that other, incorrect, meaning of One Nation Conservatism.   He made clear in his recent speech in Scotland which he had visited to have face-to-face talks with Scotland’s First Minister and Leader of the Scottish Nationalist Party Alex Salmond that he would do his utmost to maintain the union of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom, even though Scottish independence would be to his own political party’s advantage in England.  Unable to prevent a referendum on Scottish independence (after all, he does claim to believe in local autonomy) he is determined to achieve a resounding ‘No’ vote when it takes place.     

Did the public speech that David Cameron made on that occasion further or hinder his cause?   The first part of his speech could well have come directly from the Scottish tourist office, listing the illustrious Scots who have played a part in shaping Britain’s destiny. This was followed by an exposition of the reasons why he believed the Scots should reject independence. Most of these (a United Kingdom can play a larger part on the international stage than a fractured one, for instance) are also good reasons for our becoming an active member of a more closely integrated Europe!  There was as well, a promise and a not-all-that-veiled threat.   After the referendum had taken place he (no word about Parliament being in any way involved!) would consider the possibility of transferring other powers to the Scottish parliament and government that are currently held by Westminster.   That would, of course, depend upon there being a clear ‘No’ vote to Scottish Independence in the referendum.

            I don’t know how the Scots may have reacted to all that.  I do know, as an East Anglian, that if a Politician from elsewhere in the UK visited us to make a speech telling us what a wonderful contribution to British history had been made by, for instance. Hereward the Wake, Fr. John Ball,  Cardinal Wolsey, Lord Nelson, Mother Julian of Norwich, Elizabeth Fry and Edith Cavell, I would have thought he was being patronising and trying to teach his grandmother how to suck eggs!  Had that politician been David Cameron I would have been amazed that someone who had imagined, even momentarily, that in 1940 Britain had been a junior partner to the USA in the struggle against Nazism, could have had the effrontery to deliver a homily on British history to anyone at all!

            As for the threat (or possibly ‘promise’), nobody with any sense believes politicians promises and my admittedly limited knowledge of Scotland and its inhabitants suggests to me that the Scots don’t take kindly to threats. 

            If I were a resident of Scotland I would unquestionably vote YES in the forthcoming referendum on Scottish Independence.  I would certainly have much more confidence in Alex Salmon’s Scottish Nationalist government in Scotland than in David Cameron’s coalition.  They have been more successful too.  Despite Glasgow’s one-time reputation for violent gangs, there were no summer riots ‘north of the border’, and I think that, given independence, the Scots would get rid of that nuclear submarine base within their territorial waters.

            However as a resident in England (I’m too old to emigrate northwards and I don’t really think I’d care for the climate!) I have mixed feelings.  I certainly wish our Scottish neighbours and their government well – but I fear that, as David Cameron predicted, independence for Scotland would be to his party’s advantage in England.  It really wouldn’t make much difference to me.  I can hardly expect to live to see anything different.  I would be sorry though to think of my sons and grandchildren condemned to years – perhaps decades – of Europhobic ‘market obsessed’ governments with the gap between rich and poor becoming ever wider, wider….and wider still!   

‘Essex Works’ – so they claim!

            Since falling in a hotel bath on Boxing Day and having to summon help, I have been rather more conscious of ‘health and safety’ than in the past.  I am ninety, I do live alone and I am vulnerable!   I make sure that I always have my Tendring Helpline pendant and my mobile phone within reach while I am having my morning shower.  I never venture out of the house without my walking stick and mobile phone.  I have been looking round my bungalow for potential danger spots.

            One possible hazard that I have identified is just outside my front door.  There is a fairly deep step down to the concrete path.  Several years ago a kind neighbour made a wooden ramp with a non-slip surface to make it possible for me to push my wife in her wheel-chair in and out of the bungalow.  Since her sad death, now nearly six years ago, I have retained it.  I may one day need to get my mobility scooter in and out of the bungalow in the same way!   In the meantime I do find the easy slope of the ramp rather easier than using the step.

 However I realize that I am in my greatest danger of falling as I step down that ramp. I always have my stick and I descend very slowly and carefully.   There is no doubt though that I’d be much safer and more secure if I had a hand-rail to clutch as I come in or go out. 

The observant viewer will note a ‘key safe’ fixed to the wall to the right of the door. It affords the local police means of entry in an emergency.

This, I thought, is where Essex County Council’s Social Services Department will be able to help.  Promoting safety in the homes of old people living alone as I do must undoubtedly be one of the activities to which the County Council is referring in the  claim on all its printed material that Essex Works!  I surely had only to give them a ring and an expert would visit, assess my need, and arrange for a hand-rail to be fitted.  While he or she was with me I’d ask them to look round and let me know if they could see any other potential hazard that I might have missed.

            It hasn’t worked out quite as simply as I had imagined.  First came the problem of contacting the Social Services Department. One morning four weeks ago I dialled the number. Very promptly a mechanical voice told me that my call might be recorded for training purposes and that I’d be put through to one of their trained staff as soon as one became available.  Then, I waited – and waited – and waited. Eventually, it was at my second attempt on the following day, a human voice rewarded my patience.

            I explained my situation to a helpful lady who told me that before I could be helped I would need to be ‘assessed’ and that part of that assessment would, with my agreement, take place there and then by phone.   Why not?   She asked me my full name, address and email address and my date of birth – 18 May, 1921. At that she became more solicitous.  Was I able to get up unaided, wash, shave and shower and dress myself?  Feed myself?  Could I prepare my own meals? Could I do my own shopping, house cleaning and gardening (I already arrange outside help for the last two of these)?  Could I, perhaps with a washing machine, do my own laundry?  As I gave affirmative answers I could almost hear any priority that my age might have afforded, disappearing into the distance.  I was asked if I minded the information I had given being shared with other departments. ‘Not in the least’ I replied.  I would be hearing from them, I was assured, within the next few days.

            And so I did.   I received a communication telling me that I would be told the time and date of my on-the-spot assessment ‘shortly’. That was over a fortnight ago and I haven’t heard yet.  Enquiries suggest that there are three stages still to come; the on-the-spot assessment, delivery of any equipment agreed at the time of the assessment, installation of the equipment.

            It seems quite possible that, at some time or other, I’ll be able to confirm from experience that Essex Works – though not at a breakneck speed!