Welfare or Social Security

In the UK every working man pays a percentage from his earnings to the state. It's called National Insurance.

It's a fair chunk of money and paid in addition to his tax. NI (National Insurance) contributions are automatic deductions from the pay packet.

National Insurance is just that – insurance, to cover things like pensions in old age, assistance in deprivation and unemployment, free school meals for the underprivileged children, money for the disabled and infirm, a safety net to catch those who cannot help themselves. 

The icing on the cake was the National Health Service – a universal health care – free at the point of delivery.

Idealistic, daring, innovative. Morally just. The Grand Solution. A socialist, caring advance in human civilisation.

A Flashman in Number 10? Fun at last!

As an ardent fan of the Flashman Papers (and what free thinking non-pc reader couldn't be?) I was surprised to learn that the Labour opposition have nicknamed the UK Prime Minister "Flashman".

What we don't know is whether they refer to the fag-beating cowardly bully of "Tom Brown's Schooldays" or George Macdonald Fraser's reinvention of Harry as a lovable womanising, unscrupulous bounder and downright heartless villain.

As Quentin Letts, the Daily Mail's parliamentary sketch writer has commented, he suspects it's the latter, and far from being an insult, it may rebound on them and give David Cameron a kudos akin to Margaret Thatcher's "Iron Lady" badge, which was originally intended as an insult from the Russians.

I haven't been writing politically on this blog for many months because I'm still euphoric that the old new-labour government was finally dispatched to the opposition benches in the House of Commons. Also, twelve months is still too early in my book to complain about the new kids on the block. For gawd's sake give them a chance, we've just come out of 13 years of misery and incompetence.

As for the Lib-Dems, the other coalition partner, it comes as no surprise that they are the juniors in this relationship, and they are still shell-shocked that they are actually in government. The liberal following are now complaining about the ineffectuality of their leader Nick Clegg, without whose performance during the TV debates a year ago, would not have taken votes from the tories denying Flashman an overall majority. They could have joined Labour, but that would have looked like a stitch up and the country would not have stood for it.

The other alternative was for the Tories to govern by minority, effectively stifled, and making compromises until a new election could be held five months later, when they would hope to gain a majority. That may well have been the better idea in hindsight, especially as the Labour Party was in disarray, and more concerned about throwing out old baggage for new.

So now the Lib-Dems are in power and they are still moaning. They try to punch above their weight, but in essence they are nothing more than a bunch of hypocrites, and as Jose Rizal, the Philippines national hero, once remarked 120 years ago, hypocrisy is a social cancer "noli me tangere", and the Lib-dems are superb exponents of it. (I always try to have a Philippine perspective – although I admit he wasn't referring to the Liberals at the time, even though they have been around just as long!)

All I can say is that if David Cameron is Flashman then Ed Milliband is the pious, misguided and obnoxious Rugby School headteacher Dr Arnold, and  Nick Clegg is non other than Tom (nice but dim) Brown. I know which one gets my vote!

A Plague on all your Houses?

As the dust settles all is gradually revealed. So now we know that a Con-LibDem coalition is the new face of UK Governance. Whilst the pundits pontificate, already the knives are out and the disillusion of many become prevalent. But who are these unhappy souls?

Clearly they are the die-hard supporters of both sides, who feel that their party's principles have been sold down the river. The Tory right think Cameron has capitulated, and the LibDem left think their leader has sold his soul, even whored himself for power.

But what was the alternative? Clegg could have done a deal with the Labour Party, and the pact would still not have had a majority, and support would be sought from the smaller parties – a so called Rainbow Alliance.

The price would have been Gordon Brown's head and a hasty appointed new leader would become PM – yet another unelected one. It would have been a stitch up, sewn together by two characters equally unelected, namely Peter Mandelson and spin doctor extraordinaire Alistair Campbell.

The electorate would have seen through it, and regarded it as a blatant contemptuous act against the British public who firmly lost faith in the Labour government.

For all the posthumous plaudits of Gordon Brown's Prime Ministerial tenure, it was clear he was being led, not leading, hence his two appearances at the lectern outside no 10 – first to resign as Leader of the Labour Party (a cynical ploy in a last ditch attempt to garner Clegg) – and second, to finally resign as Prime Minister when he knew the game was up.

This behaviour is typical of his indecision as previously reflected by his weakness to strike when the iron was hot in the early days of his premiership. Had he held an election back then, his mandate to govern could have been sealed, and his position of strength re-enforced. But that was Gordon, and history will play it over, analysing and dissecting it for years to come.

The second option was in the hands of the Conservatives. Could David Cameron have formed a minority government, constantly having to do deals with the opposition parties, and being stifled at every turn in an attempt to push through policy?

Sooner or later a vote of no confidence would have been implemented and the nation would likely have gone to the polls yet again in a matter of months. Many Tories would have preferred that, but the nation would have suffered – indeed any chance of economic recovery would have been hindered by back-biting, and partisan wheeling and dealing resulting in impotence.

And so we have reached the third and most favourable option – a coalition. Both Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have had to shift and compromise on their manifestos. The Tory's were not going to budge on some key issues, but in return the Lib-Dems have found cabinet positions in Government – the first time for decades.

It's encouraging that a five year deal has been made, but it will be a tenuous and fragile relationship.

David Cameron, for all the perception of class and privilege, has changed the Conservatives. He is an exponent of Disraeli and believes that the greater good must be above political posturing. It may be that this will be his downfall, for in the wings there is an opposition Labour Party, many of whose members hope with great selfish regard that this coalition will fail, opening up the chance that they will return to power soon.

It is this mercenary outlook which creates the odious smell representing all that is bad in politics. Whilst some Labour MP's have wished this partnership well, there are many who hope it will crash.

Beware these politicos and their ilk, for they are the festering bacteria of disease and plague.

A plague on all your houses is a sentiment not sensible today.

The dynamic has changed. It should be given a chance.

We’re All Hung Up….Our Gasters have been Flabbered…

Well it was to be expected I suppose. The Tories got the most seats, but not enough to form a majority government. The LibDem's bubble burst amid all the hype of change and personality, and the tired old Labour party got their just deserts. The wheeling and dealing will now take place and chances are David Cameron will become PM supported by Nick Clegg and his LibDems.

Probably the most dignified departure of a losing Prime Minister was by John Major, who having been defeated by Tony Blair in 1997 calmly walked away to watch the cricket at Lords. It was a lovely sunny day and a perfect one for watching the cork on willow. That was statesmanship and a rare thing today.

Gordon Brown has the opportunity to follow suit, and anything less by hanging on to power by his fingertips can only prolong the inevitable. Go gracefully Gordon. Let Mandy and Milly play their games of intrigue to salvage the spoils. If however Clegg joins Labour, then frankly I may seriously consider a one way ticket east. After all, how can the party with the most votes end up being squeezed out by collusion. It's preposterous. We will know soon how principled Nick Clegg truly is.

So I would hope that even if Cameron doesn't get the support he wants, there's still a chance he could go it alone, perhaps he could become the new 21st century Disraeli. The Queen is involved with all this somehow, though how much influence she has I know not. Even the academics appear confused on the constitutional intricacies.

On a local level I'm delighted that my constituency MP was soundly given the boot. The ex-Labour incumbent nicknamed Mrs Expenses suffered the delusion that her abuse of parliamentary privileges to the tune of using tax payers money to buy a luxury central London pad a mere ten miles from her main home, would be overshadowed by her work in the community. Fortunately the people saw sense. Her defence was that it was within the rules. The fact is that it was an immoral abuse of the rules and put her interests over and above the very people she should be representing.

So goodbye and good riddance is my sentiment.

Stand up and be counted….

The UK television party leader debates are far more exciting than their US equivalents. Having been highly suspicious of the merits of this novelty in British politics, they certainly give value for money.

As I've said before, I consider them to be nothing more than a media entertainment exercise and fear that the electorate will vote on presentation over policy. This was demonstrated last week by the sudden national favour of Nick Clegg. The LibDem leader scored overwhelming points over his rivals due to style and continues to a degree after the second debate.

An advantage of having a blog is the ability to express an opinion globally. Whether it has any influence is academic. I make my position very clear. Whilst I divide my time between two very different countries I am British born and bred.

That birthright means much to me. It says that my nation has been the principle architect of the modern world from the extraction of Spanish world dominance in the sixteen century through to the industrial revolution, technological advancement, the implementation of democracy and parliamentary systems, the defence of a way of life against tyranny, the dominance of English as a language and the tolerance of other nations and peoples in an ever changing world.

It is the belief that the United Kingdom has been a force for good where trade and democracy succeeded over facist and dictatorial exploitation. Many would argue that the British were the arbiters of that statement, but few could argue that the fundamental Victorian values were for the best intentions regardless of the often misguided philanthropy engendered.

The class system needed change, yet it was the very essence of the trade union movement, long before the advent of a Socialist or Labour party which fuelled workers rights. Socialism grew out of a desire for change, and after World War II, the old order was rejected – it was a time for change.

The pendulum swung too far, and the dream to provide for all created a free-for-all. The welfare state and universal free heathcare was a bold vision and the post war Attlee Government delivered the dream.

They could not have envisaged the abuse or bottomless pit where lurked a dragon which was always hungry, nor that it would create a dependant culture which believed that the state will always provide. Nor contemplated that the welfare state would account for billions of pounds to sustain year on year.

Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit, Income Support, Child Benefit, Childrens Tax Credits, Incapacity Benefits et al can all be given to a family to the tune of at least £1500 per month tax free – more than can be achieved through honest basic employment. The benefit culture encourages irresponsibility, more children, and a mindset that expects the state to provide. The children grow up in that culture and so the cycle continues.

You see, I want a country which protects and provides for the less fortunate. I want a country which can stand proud and give opportunities and encouragement to the young. I want a country that my children are proud to belong to. I want a country which will not kowtow or be subservient to aggressive nations. I want a country which will instill pride in their subjects regardless of their race, ethnicity, creed or religion. I want a country which will not be lead but leads. I want a country which says to its citizens that you should stand proud and give more than you take, and above all I want a country which is strong and holds dear to its history.

Which party will do that? I suspect there is only one – and thats the one which will get my vote on May 6th, 2010.

The Marmite Election

My daughter (at university seeking a BA hons in Education) has been invited to shadow a prospective parliamentary candidate for our London constituency. Apparently she has been vociferous in her criticism of him on his website, remarking on his poor performance (in her opinion) as a ward councillor.

I wouldn't say he was ineffectual, its just that his priorities are at odds with hers. There has been some banter back and forth with emails, and now that he is his official party's candidate (no names no pack drill – but one of the big three) he is keen to demonstrate his policies and show her the hard work he will be doing on the hustings.

I think she baited him by implying that she intended to enter politics and could do a damn sight better job. This clearly riled him and he suggested that perhaps she should be a councillor first before she attempted to attain the lofty heights of Parliament.

I think he's got a fair chance of toppling the current incumbent, and I admire his bravery. Not because he's seeking election in a cutthroat business, but because he's prepared to be accompanied for two long days with a volatile and highly critical individual. He's taking a big risk.

My daughter is a bit like Marmite – you either love it or hate it. But I'm biased because I'm very fond of Marmite. But even I can only spread it thinly on toast in the mornings. Eating it all day, for all its packed with vitamins and goodness, could be very challenging.

It puts me in a quandary because he doesn't represent the party of my choice, and yet I think he would make a good MP. I've never been one for tactical voting, and I've only got one vote. There's a lot at stake in this UK election – I value my vote and my right to it has been achieved through the sweat and tears of my ancestors.

I abhor people who say they are not going to vote because they can't be bothered or say there is no point – to me it is the epitome of idle ignorance.

Eat Marmite, you may not like the taste, but you'll feel better afterwards. That's what voting is all about!