The Queens Speech - Are These Tory Bills good?

So today is the queen speech. Luckily the BBC have a page on the policies the speech will use, so I shall use it's descriptions for each and then explain what I, as a reasonably normal young person of the UK makes of each possible bill.



EU Referendum Bill





This is high up on the list of the government's priorities. David Cameron has promised to renegotiate Britain's terms of membership of the European Union and put it to a public vote by 2017 at the latest. To do this he'll need to publish a parliamentary bill to pave the way for a referendum - so it's a definite to feature in the speech.


James Thinks: This is not a good idea, we have already seen how the British Electorate vote and for too many people, life depends on being within the European Union. Cornwall and Wales are two places that have a funding match from the EU and without this these two relatively deprived places would be further deprived. Therefore a vote on this matter isn't a good idea as it seems that far too many people will vote with a severe misunderstanding. Some will argue the EU needs change, but you can't change anything from the outside. Plus it could mean removing the free movement we currently have around Europe.




Income Tax Bill





During the general election campaign, David Cameron vowed to introduce a law guaranteeing no rise in income tax rates, VAT or national insurance before 2020. He said workers already paid enough tax and he would focus on other ways of clearing the deficit, such as reducing the welfare bill and tackling tax avoidance. The PM has also pledged a law to ensure that "no one working 30 hours on the minimum wage pays any income tax at all". Writing in the Sunday Telegraph about his first 100 days in office, he said: "It is a permanent measure to re-write not just the laws of this country but the values of this country. And it will be there as the centrepiece of the first Queen's Speech of my new government."


James Thinks: You shouldn't need a law to ensure you won't increase taxes. It's therefore ridiculous and the question that then comes out ends up being "where are you going to cut to make up for this". If the answer is welfare, health, public services or education then it's nothing short of a disgrace.




Immigration Bill





The government is promising a crackdown on illegal immigration, and has already set out a number of new offences to try to "control and reduce" migration to the UK. These include a specific offence of illegal working - with police given the power to seize the wages paid to illegal workers as the "proceeds of crime". Among other proposals being considered are new powers for councils to deal with unscrupulous landlords and to evict illegal migrants more quickly, while all foreign criminals awaiting deportation will be fitted with satellite tracking tags. It will also become an offence for businesses and recruitment agencies to hire abroad without first advertising in the UK - a policy which featured prominently in Labour's election manifesto - and a new enforcement agency will be set up to tackle what the prime minister called "the worst cases of exploitation".


James Thinks: We need to take people who need sure that all people who need to get away from their country due to issues are able to come. For instance Iraq, where some of the blame of what's going on has to come down to the United Kingdom for destabilising the country. It's about human lives, not anything else. And we owe a duty of care. It would be a more productive thing than to waste resources sending people out to fight.




Policing Bill





Home Secretary Theresa May has pledged to ban the use of police cells for the emergency detention of mentally ill people under the Mental Health Act. In a speech to the annual conference of the Police Federation in England and Wales, Mrs May also outlined plans to extend police-led prosecutions, overhaul the complaints system, and change the use of bail.


James Thinks: The Coalition couldn't be trusted with the police making them considerably weaker, I have a horrible thing this will happen again. They cut 34,000 police staff in the last election and many think it'll be similar again. This means that anything that happens within a police bill is likely to actually end up not being able to be enforced successfully as the stress of the job gets higher and higher.




City Devolution Bill





We know that proposals to devolve more powers to England's cities will feature in the Queen's Speech. Chancellor George Osborne said as much in first post-election speech, in which he outlined his vision to give English cities powers over housing, transport, planning and policing. He said Greater Manchester - which will take on the powers when electing a mayor in two years - should become a blueprint for other large cities.


James Thinks: It should be regional...not city. How can Devon or Cornwall have devolution by City? Or many other smaller places. Also Newcastle and many other Cities voted against elected Mayors.




Strike laws reform





The new business secretary, Sajid Javid, has said it will be a government priority to reform strike laws. Specifically, it is proposing to ban strike action from taking place unless 40% of all eligible union members vote in favour of industrial action. The government also wants to lift a ban on use of agency staff when strike action takes places. "That's something we'll give more detail on in the Queen's Speech but it will be a priority," Mr Javid told BBC Radio 4's Today programme earlier this month.


James Thinks: It's removing employees rights, at times there may be a legitimate right for a few to enter. Also ironic that a Government elected by less than 40% of the British Electorate who voted and less than 25% of those eligible could demand 40% of the vote for a strike...




Employment Bill





The Conservatives have said measures on work will be at the heart of their legislative programme, with David Cameron saying during the election campaign that the UK should aspire to "full employment". He has pledged legislation on "day one" of the new Parliament. Among the priorities will be a push to create two million more jobs and three million more apprenticeships over the course of the Parliament. The boost in apprenticeships is to be paid for by reducing the benefit cap from £26,000 to £23,000.


James Thinks: They haven't succeeded with employment issues and I know it...This'll probably at some point see workers rights fall like the bill above.




Schools Bill





The prime minister has pledged to bring in a bill to "deliver better schools - with more radical measures to ensure young people leave education with the skills they need". He said the legislation will "include new powers to force coasting schools, as well as failing schools, to accept new leadership, continuing the remarkable success story of Britain's academy schools". The Conservatives want to expand their free schools programme - which Labour opposes, with Mr Cameron committing to creating an extra 270,000 free school places by 2020.


James Thinks: Two words Michael Gove. They saw that man fit to deal with the education system 5 years ago. Now, how can things get better...well let's start with scrapping free schools and making academies go back to schools run by Governors and the more successful systems before these changes 5 years ago?




Childcare Bill





Another stated key priority of the Conservative government is childcare. Currently, all three and four-year olds in England are entitled to 570 hours of free early education or childcare a year, which works out as 15 hours each week for 38 weeks of the year. During the election campaign, the Conservatives promised 30 hours from 2017. The prime minister has also said he wants to introduce tax-free childcare for every child.


James Thinks: Three words: Labour offered better




Enterprise Bill





The government has outlined plans for a bill to cut red tape for British business by at least £10bn and, for the first time, independent regulators will be expected to contribute to that target. The bill is also expected to propose a new Small Business Conciliation Service, to help settle disputes between small and large businesses, especially over late payment practices.


James Thinks: It's not easy to set up a business and many can't afford to it, where is there help? It's important we see people do well, but we need to do this in ways that also help people who don't own their own business. Also Labour also offered help to small business whilst keeping in mind those who don't have their own.




Scotland Bill





The prime minister has pledged to include a bill on devolution which would be based on the cross-party Smith Commission agreement on Scottish devolution. The Smith proposals included giving Holyrood the power to set income tax rates and bands, as well as control over a share of VAT and some welfare benefits.


James Thinks: Scotland's going to be better to live in than England very very soon.




Human Rights Act Repeal Bill





The Conservatives have pledged to abolish the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights. The Conservative manifesto says: "This will break the formal link between British courts and the European Court of Human Rights, and make our own Supreme Court the ultimate arbiter of human rights matters in the UK."


James Thinks: It's a disgrace that we even consider removing this. It is Churchill's legacy and it's an important act. Only one country in Europe isn't signed up to this and this country is also the only dictatorship.




Counter-extremism Bill





The government is expected to bring forward a new bill to crack down on radicalisation. It will include new immigration rules, powers to close down premises used by extremists, and "extremism disruption orders". Mr Cameron has repeatedly stressed the need to confront and defeat the "poisonous" extremist ideology. The proposals are likely to encounter some opposition in the new Parliament on the grounds that some of the plans could infringe people's right to free speech, BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said.


James Thinks: This simply comes down to whether it effects our privacy. Which is a right.




Communications and Data Bill





This was the bill that the Conservatives' smaller coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats, refused to back in the last Parliament. Current legislation expires in 2016 and will have to be renewed. So now the Conservatives are governing alone, they can bring back what opponents call the snoopers' charter. The previous plans proposed to extend the range of data communications companies have to store for 12 months. It would have included, for the first time, details of messages sent on social media, webmail, voice calls over the internet and gaming, in addition to emails and phone calls. Officials would not have been able to see the content of the messages without a warrant. Currently communications firms only retain data about who people send emails to, and who they ring.


James Thinks: And this is exactly what I mean when I said it comes down to the privacy. We should not live in a society where people can see everything we are sending. It's not private and could be used for the wrong reasons. The Snoopers Bill can't happen. End of.




Housing Bill





Housing was a hot topic during the general election, featuring in all of the parties' campaigns. One of the Conservatives' key pledges was an extension of Margaret Thatcher's Right to Buy scheme to 1.3 million housing association tenants in England - and the government has confirmed this will feature. Under the plans, housing association tenants will be able to buy the homes they rent at a discount. Communities Minister Greg Clark told the BBC the government wanted to extend the opportunity for people to own their home. There will also be help for first-time buyers, with 200,000 starter homes made available to under-40s at a 20% discount - another Conservative manifesto pledge.


James Thinks: See this article.




NHS Bill





The Conservatives made several commitments on the NHS during the election campaign - and David Cameron used his first major post-election speech to focus on his plans for the health service in England. He has pledged to boost funding by at least £8bn extra a year by 2020 and to create "a truly seven-day NHS". The government is also promising to recruit 5,000 new GPs.


James Thinks: Let's wait and see, I have a funny feeling we could be waving goodbye to our NHS sooner rather than later.




Wales Bill





David Cameron has pledged to implement "as fast as I can the devolution that all parties agreed for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland". Wales Secretary Stephen Crabb has said his officials were writing legislation to transfer further powers to Wales, so these could be included in the Queen's Speech.


James Thinks: I've got a feeling this won't go brilliantly for Wales. But again, could this mean the Government just wiping their hands and trying to set a rival party up. It wouldn't surprise you.




Hunting Ban Repeal Bill





Could David Cameron throw a bone to his Conservative backbenchers and introduce legislation to repeal the law that bans fox hunting with dogs? The ban has been unpopular in many rural areas since its introduction by Labour in 2004 - and David Cameron has indicated he would like to undo it. Their manifesto stated that a Conservative government "will give Parliament the opportunity to repeal the Hunting Act on a free vote, with a government bill in government time".


James Thinks:Fox hunting is wrong and elitist. We should be trying to eradicate elitism. Watching the Queens Speech we are a long was off being successful with removing elitist rubbish. First elitist establishments that would need sorting are Eton (close the place) and a bit of a nudge on Cambridge and Oxford who have no right to regard themselves as supreme to others (I would make the boat race have a week of time trials before a race between the top 2 or 3 rather than the Elitist rubbish that it is).




Legal highs ban





Legislation to introduce a blanket ban on so-called legal highs is expected to feature in the Queen's Speech. The proposal was included in the Conservatives' general election manifesto, which stated: "We will create a blanket ban on all new psychoactive substances, protecting young people from exposure to so-called 'legal highs'." A Home Office source told the BBC that the proposal would be enacted upon.


James Thinks: If you cut the police, good luck enforcing this!

Student Loans - Need For Reform

Hey guys! So this is spontaneous, although I would like to write this well as I am to send this blog off as a link to many different people including some MP's as I think it's important that they at least have the option to see an average students view of the Student Loan. I am also aware that some people don't go to university and they may see it as a choice that we have made, including the financial burden of the loan, for you people, we do choose to go to University, we don't choose to receive what we do from the student loan. Anyway, here I go.

I believe the system that Student Finance England use at present an unfair way regarding the way loans are given out. Now there are reasons why I regard this the case and I shall be explaining them and then what I would change about them. I shall also be making an e-petition which I shall link at the bottom of this blog for all you people who agree with me to sign.

Student Loans and The Means Test
My generation seem to come from an age where everything has been means tested around our parents income. I can still remember EMA and what I remember from this are the people that received the £30 a week. I remember a lot of the people who got this bragged about it, unfortunately the people that bragged about having £30 to go and spend (and 99% of the time not a penny of this expenditure was on educational resources but the latest games, alcohol and cinema tickets) had parents that didn't work. I had a friend who was one of these people and what annoyed me most wasn't the fact he got £30 a week but that his parents didn't work out of choice and he was being rewarded over people such as myself getting considerably more money than me, which he spent on games, because my parents worked when his decided years before to give up employment years before. My parents weren't earning particularly much, especially after tax, my dad being a Methodist Minister whilst my Mum worked part time as a care worker. This prevented me from EMA but my parents couldn't afford to give me £30 to support me. And my opinion stands now with the student loan.

The same person I mentioned I can use as a classic example here with their student loan. We are both going to the same University and last year we lived together (although he has recently decided not to talk to me as I asked him back to help when it came to cleaning the flat). He got around the £7,000 mark, yet he also got a bursary from the University of Plymouth itself because of his parents low income, his bursary was over £900. Now fair you may say, people need money to get by at University, yet I got a £300 bursary and a loan of less than £100 over £6,000. My parents can't afford to make up the difference so once again it feels like he was getting rewarded for the fact his parents don't work. At the end of the day, just because someones parents earns so much it doesn't mean that the student profits thanks to their parents. We aren't our parents, the money they earn therefore doesn't go into our bank accounts and when we're not at home it's not money that buys us food. Therefore how is it even fair to give us so much less because our parents have jobs, not amazingly well paid jobs at that. I also have friends at Uni who I am living with next year who get even less. Around the £5,000 mark. Now after rent, that would be around the £600 mark over three terms, a whole University year, now Ian Duncan Smith may claim he can live on the costs of benefits, but try living on less than £20 a week and tell me it's fair.

So what do I think is fair, I think the only fair way is removal of the means test. All students should get the same amount, it therefore means that there are no people showing off that they have more money because their parents don't work, it also will mean people aren't struggling on less than £20 a week relying on family handouts to survive at University. It would solve the issue of parents having to give money to their children constantly because they are earning money, not that much money at that. It's ridiculous. The system needs to be fair. That is my aim to get through whilst writing this post. The one thing I would add in is that I also know different people have different distances to travel and I believe that the majority use trains, I do think that regarding termly trains a system where a percentage of the train journey can be claimed back from a system would be beneficial for students especially given the current system where many people get very little.

Before I move on to my second part, I noticed this is an area where people will go and say "get a job", well I tried all summer so far in the Gedling/Nottingham area, I looked and could only find commission jobs, I did have a go at it, but I wasn't skilled at selling a charity door to door, only a few people can and if you can't sell it enough you actually end up losing more than you earn as you are paid per sale. I have my opinions on these companies which I will keep mainly for another day but I thought being paid on commission whilst doing twelve hour shifts and a lot of the time losing money on transport etc was fairly degrading especially when you knocked on the doors of those people that were just incredibly foul and rude, which unfortunately you get. There were no jobs going that were willing to give me a chance (if you're reading this and thinking "your CV must need major improvement, I assure you I believe it is very good at saying what I have done, however I am more than willing to send it to you should you email me). But I do agree that for many people who get these jobs on commission, it can feel degrading, especially in an economic climate where people don't want to sign up to give £10 more a month to a charity however good they may be.

Student Rent Regulation
Now I believe the first idea I gave is a fairly simple and logical idea to implement, now although I feel this is not as simple I feel that this may well be one of the only fair ways to go regarding how much rent students are paying. First of all I am going to give you a simple sum of my rent next year per term.

Student Loan: £6004 / 3 = £2001.25
Rent: £1440
Student Loan - Rent = £561.25 (rounded to £561)
Term 1 - Four Months - £561 / 4 = £140.25 / 4.5 = £31.16

That folks is my weekly budget before I take out a £40 train journey, my railcard (which comes up for renewal in December) and any course costs such as items for my dissertation, lectures and seminars, which would considerably lower that £561. You probably notice that the main expense here is clearly the rent of my room within the house. A huge amount. Now I remember hearing that rent should be about 50%, it is now way above this. My theory for this is that the houses should all be checked by the University. The houses ranked A (the ones in very good condition) should charge a maximum of 50% of the student loan, a house ranked B (good condition) should charge a maximum of 42.5% of the student loan and a house ranked C (satisfactory condition) should charge a maximum of 35% of the student loan. A radical change? Yes, but one that see's that students get two things.
1) Enough money to live on for the year from their student loan without to much panicking.
2) The option to save more money by going for a lesser property and essentially getting what you pay for (this comes from living in a property that was not as good as first thought with the viewing etc last year).

Conclusion
Both of these policies together create a feeling of safety for students, a feeling that is lacked with some students at the current time. I believe many students including myself spend a long time worrying about how much money we may have for the next week. Whether we can go out and do anything enjoyable, whether it be a trip to the pub or hiring a 5-a-side pitch for an hour, I'm not talking about really expensive leisure. As I'm sure you agree, it is nice to go to sleep feeling financially safe. Something students don't get to do a lot nowadays, especially on loans like myself (or like some friends, even less).

I am also aware of two facts people may say, so I shall answer them now.

How much should this Student Loan without Means Testing be?
Well I look at the rent in Plymouth first, I gave you a pretty average amount in the £1440 per term, that's less than what my rent was last year marginally. However there are 9 people in this house and lowering the rent to £1000 would still see the owner receive £27k a year just from one household! If it was £1500 per term we are talking of them receiving in excess of £40k a year for a 9 person house. A lot of this is due to inflation and the factor that the competition rises together there is no competitor trying to give a good house for cheap rent in a decent location for students really. So although I don't think landlords should lost too much, I don't want to see many thousands of people in debt they'll never get out of (although with £9k tuition fees it could be argued this is the case), therefore I would say between £2200 and £2400 per term. I would look at the first term though and be aware it is a month longer than the second and make sure that the student loan realises this. If the first term was £2400, the second £2200 and the third £2000 the rent would be a maximum of £3300. Not bad income for a landlord I would presume and not too badder sums for a student.
Therefore in answer to the question I am going to say around between £6600 and £7000 with a rise with the rate of inflation every year. It isn't much more than we are giving to some today. The loan would not decrease for third year (I have learnt that this happens, for no legitimate reason either, apparently our term finishes earlier, funny the exams often finish later than first and second years, making the year longer)

Landlords aren't going to be happy with this proposal
When it comes to this comment, I have to be honest, the landlord is still making a huge amount of money. The landlord often charges for the unnecessary months in Plymouth of June and July, exams end in May, the summer ball is in May 90% of the time, so why do we pay two months more anyway. Therefore I think if the landlord feels they are losing money, perhaps the contract can be shorter and end at the end of June, given I am unaware of University's hosting exams in July.


Do you feel the same way about the student system as I do? Do you feel that Student Finance needs some reform? Then email your MP, you can even send this blog and hopefully the issues with the current Student Finance system can get some recognition.

PLEASE NOTE
I have created an e-petition, however I am currently waiting for it to be approved. I shall be adding the e-petition here when it is done. If you want to sign it please follow me on twitter @totalJPM and I shall let you know the link when it is ready.

Remember, there is no way that anything will happen about this if we do nothing, act now!

General Concerns From A Student

I'm currently frustrated that I can't seem to get a job. I have a CV that I've tampered with to make it feel like it's the best CV I can come up with and commonly write individual personal statements per job I apply for yet I get nothing, therefore I have taken the time to email various MP's with my issues. Here is the letter.

Dear Sir or Madam,

This email I am sending you is of my general concerns as a student and as a citizen of this country, I shall cover various points and I would appreciate it if you could read my email. First of all though I shall go through why I chose to include you in this email.

Regarding the MP's of Nottingham and Gedling this is area where I reside in the summer when I'm not at University. 

Regarding the MP's of Plymouth this is where I study my degree in Criminology and the Criminal Justice System with Law.

Regarding Geoffrey Cox the MP of Torridge, this is where I used to live before my parents moved in 2011. 

Regarding David Cameron, George Osbourne, Ian Duncan Smith and Michael Gove of the Conservative Party this is because I feel each of you are relevant to issues I am going to bring up within this email. 

Regarding Ed Miliband, Ed Balls, Stephen Twigg and Liam Byrne of the Labour Party, I believe you are in the equivalent opposition members to the people mentioned in the Conservative Party. 

Regarding Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats, I believe his party once built a reputation about caring for young people as well as the rest of the country.

Regarding George Galloway and Caroline Lucas, I believe being sole representatives of their party that they should also receive this email (I have not included parties from Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales due to the slight differences regarding having seperate parliaments as well as Westminster and my knowledge not spreading to how this effects their roles regarding the concerns in this email). 

First of all may I congratulate you on winning the seats that you did in the last General Election. I would also like to thank you for being part of the Parliament that has discovered the truth of the Hillsborough disaster and I hope that this leads to those families getting the justice that they deserve. 

I am an average 20 year old student attending the University of Plymouth, I attend all my lectures and carry out all my essays to what I believe is the best of my ability, however I also enjoy the social aspects of University too. I believe this is the same with many of my friends who agree with the majority of the concerns which I shall raise in this email. 

First of all I would like to highlight my concern of a lack of opportunities for students in the Summer, due partly to the current state of the economy which let's be blunt, it's not exactly great. Therefore many students like myself live summer with little money so the chance to go out and do something can't be taken, this is a point that applies even more to a rural community miles away from the nearest town. Without money students are left all day being this lazy picture that many of the media seem to paint of them, but this may not be out of choice like many perceive. Even in a prosperous area the amount of jobs going for students is not great. Why? you may be asking. This answer would be that a lot of employers now don't have the funds to invest in extra staff for the summer, this may involve time taken by training the individuals or simply that the public have less money so despite it being summer they don't feel they need these employees. I realise that one of the things you may email back are the opportunities to volunteer. I would like to clarify here that although my next point will cover it more that because of the rent and money involved with some university courses that just volunteering and gaining nothing financially can be detrimental to the student. But if these students are not getting an income (and only a few really have the "bank of mum and dad" as our parents are generally not millionaires), then it can be detrimental to businesses that depend on young people, these businesses being for instance nightclubs, which hold a lot of jobs for people in the society.

So now onto my second point, the student loan. Now here I'm not talking about tuition fees despite my anger that this was put up to £9,000 for students the year below me, which means many years with a debt in their name, there were alternatives that I can point out to each of you about this (a graduate tax for the graduates who are earning over £30,000 for instance), but I really wish to talk about the actual maintenance loan. I read somewhere and have been told by a lecturer before that the rent of a property for a student should be around 50% of the loan. Now I live in Plymouth at term times and I'm living in a house that is £86-£90 a week, which is considerably cheaper than some places. This is costing £4,500 a year however as all landlords seem to charge for June and July despite the fact that exams finish in May in Plymouth. Therefore this year that was £860 extra I've paid for rent without being there. This therefore works out at 75% rather than 50% of the maintenance loan, giving a student £1500 to live on for about 8 months. You may say you can do this, as I know one of the recipients of this email has essentially said, well try it. It isn't easy. Therefore this year that was £860 extra I've paid for rent without being there. This may be easier if every student could get a job, however as I previously highlighted the lack of opportunities made for them because of the economy means only some students can get a job. Even more annoying for some, particularly myself is that when me and my sister who is two years younger did our student finances, in my third year where I have a dissertation which I have always aimed to do a survey using an iPad. Apparently the dissertation that the majority of students have to do in their final year is overlooked by this loan as when I phoned to ask about this my answer was because my degree finishes in May, however with the money students have to put into their dissertation that reason I'm sure you'll agree is outrageous.

Both these point I have risen with you leads to students feeling like they are not listened too which leads to a lack of motivation generally. These young people are the future of the country and therefore making them feel like no hopers is a negative stance. I realise there are the arguments around no money to spend, but this is not the case, if there is more money put in, there will be more money spent by these people eventually in the long term leading to the upturn of the economy and preventing any scenario like Greece. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that the current ways aren't working but are letting people suffer, in the case of this email the young adults, but I'm sure other age groups suffer too. Look at the average age of someone buying their first house for instance, it should be in the early twenties really, we should be looking to get people to settle rather than to live and depend on their parents, it's extra strain on everyone the way people are now in their thirties or forties when they get their own house. It's something to be proud of and someone in their twenties getting their house if they've worked for it and houses are affordable for them, which right now they are not, would lead to pride. It would make communities safer. Me and my cousins were attacked on my sisters 18th birthday last December in Arnold. We hadn't had a drink, but don't you think that the young people who attacked us would be somewhere else, doing something more positive or at least legal, if they felt like they had hope with doing what they want to do with their life, trying to create a fulfilling career rather than watching the country melt down with shops closing, buildings being boarded up, people losing their homes? And let's be honest with people losing their homes, I'm sure we all agree that keeping people in their homes is more important than paying millions to a funeral for a woman that the public seem mixed on.

I also would like to raise both the NHS and legal aid in this email. As a Criminology and Law student, I know stuff about legal aid and as a citizen of the country I'm bound to know about the NHS, and taking these services away, or making people pay for them will lead to even more of a meltdown as a country, I want to see the country be able to proudly shout about how we have a health service for everyone in the country, I want to hear us shout about how whether you be rich or poor you can get a fair trial with a decent lawyer. This country has been proud of these things for decades, privatising the NHS or making legal aid very niche is a very negative thing to do. The NHS is one of the best things about this country and in all honesty I'd rather see the defence budget cut, and nuclear weaponry lessened or stopped as the nation won't be attacked in a way that needs a nuclear bomb, than the NHS, something that doesn't attack other nations but actually looks after it's own people in their times of need. The NHS saved my uncles life when he had a brain tumour and I am incredibly grateful for the great service they gave to him. Privatising it seems to only make it much more of a confusion institution. 

I hope you can respond to my concerns. And I hope you can see into my reasoning. There are times with the way the countries run that I would like to stand in an election to just put through my opinions and that of many other people within my age group because right now it's an age group that want to be listened to but just don't seem to get the recognition that they should. 

Yours sincerely

James Martin