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!

General Election Letter To Local Tory Candidate

As you know the General Election is only a month away now and as I believe the current system is flawed for many, I thought I would send emails to all local candidates to see the response. The first party I have emailed was the Conservative party.

I will copy the letter into a post and I shall update it when/if I receive a reply. If it helps one more person vote then I regard it as a success. If the outcome of the election see's no real notable positive change then I believe it is down to us as one to stand up and let our opinions be known one way or another. Anyway here we go:

Email sent: April 7th 15.36

Dear The Conservative Candidate for West Cardiff,

I am a constituent to the area you propose to be a member of parliament for. It will be my first election as a voter with myself being finally over the age barrier (which I personally believe should be lowered to 16 giving the fact I had many friends in my 6 form last election who were into the general election). I lived in Torridge that time and although I wanted the Conservatives to win I didn’t want the Tory candidate to win due to his pretty appalling attendance rate in Parliament due to his second job (Geoffrey Cox) and therefore for that seat was preferable to the Liberal Democrats, especially with their tuition fee pledge being much liked by my age group. Their tuition pledge which rather than holding onto when you formed coalition with them, was scrapped for one of the most pointless referendums in mankinds history. A pledge which after being broken, had salt put into the wounds with the fees going up to £9000. This put a lot of my better friends into an average of £44k of debt. Is this fair for our future generation? Do the future decide to be punished for the presents faults with the economy? We feel used, your party told us there were no plans, the Lib Dems told us they would scrap them. We end up with £9000 tuition feels for sometimes 10 hours of lectures and tutorials a week If we were going to pay a bigger loan perhaps paying a bigger maintenance loan would have annoyed us left with many people having to scrap money off their parents or out of their savings to even cover their rent in Plymouth or have more than £10 to live on a week. How does this make you feel like the party of the normal people? The people trying to make a way in life? Doesn’t it just feel like a punishment for having ambition? And how are we not going to feel the pinch when we wipe the majority of it off?  However I am finding it difficult to find reasons to vote conservative in this general election.

I have since been to University, in Plymouth where I studied Criminology and Law. Aims included looking into such careers as the police, or doing a Graduate Diploma of Law and begin my training to become a lawyer. However since leaving university I preferred the idea of the first more. However cuts to public spending makes it very difficult to find any way of applying to be a PCSO or a Police Officer never mind get in. Plus the Police and Crime Commissioner is one of the most pointless posts in the world, with it just leaving to public disillusion with how the police are run. This is proven by the low turnout in the election for them and to an extent it politicalises the police which is something that should never happen. We’ve all heard about some of the misdemeanours of South Yorkshire police with the mining strikes with some alleged Government involvement.

Beyond my aim for this career, it is also difficult to get a job. I want full time work, but when I search it isn’t readily available to an entrance level, with mainly part time and zero hours available. I had a zero hours contract at Wetherspoons, however turning up at 10 and finishing at 1 was a waste of time for me with it taking an hour to walk too both ways. So it really only lasted a few weeks when the Autumn rugby was on.

So I have found myself on JSA. And whilst I look for a job that's fine. Better that than nothing, despite the total control they try to get to your life, almost making you feel like a criminal, a scrounger when you go in. Is that fair? I’m active in looking for work! I prefer to apply for a few hours every other day however I am told then it looks like I haven’t applied certain  days but I’ve applied for 20 jobs a week in average the last 6 months? Am I a criminal for that? Is this Big Brother society in the DWP fair? What would you do about this?

Add insult to injury I was put onto a Movement to Work course. Now okay, work experience can be important. I’d much prefer it to be in the sector I have done a degree to go into of course (but those good old spending cuts have ruined my ambition of that for now, seen a decrease in reported crime but a rise in unreported crime with the police lacking the resources and public backing nowadays), but my real problem with this is, when I see your stats about how many people are in work, I count as someone who does work. I don’t get paid for it! Okay I get my Kob Seekers but then if you call that a wage, that’s £2 an hour. If that counts as employed by the Government, they might as well include any form of slave labour! There isn't a real option of a job at the end of the four weeks, but I count as employed which makes me wonder what are the figures of employment when you take away the people that aren’t actually employed? Does your party know? Or do you just have these fake statistics, as that’s what they are the way they currently are formed. So when I see this Tory job miracle I’m left thinking its b*ll*cks.

And finally, if your policies are so damn good, why when I go on facebook, or see a tory campaign poster, or when I see your chancellor (who despite people like myself having the issues I have listed above, wont rule out a tax cut for the wealthy) and leader make an appearance on the news do I just get the perception that your campaign isn’t based on policies, it’s based on slating the leader of the opposition, Ed Miliband? The personal swipes are just bullying and I’ve seen nothing in your leader to say he’s a better leader than Miliband or indeed Clegg. Why do I open a newspapers website, a newspaper that’s openly Tory, and rather than see “look at this amazing policy” do I see “vote us because Miliband is incompetent” or “they might go into coalition with the SNP”. It’s not like your party haven't had a coalition, plus the SNP, Plaid and the Greens would only want a vote by vote alliance. And it’s not like your party’s coalition stuck to all their policies. And can you rule out a coalition with UKIP who want to split us up with Europe who poorer parts of the nation such as Wales and Cornwall need?

After all of this, can you explain to me, why your party deserve my vote?

Thanks,

James.

A Response To Professor J Meirion Thomas' Article In The Daily Mail.

The NHS, in my opinion the greatest thing that this country has ever done for it's people. From a day when Governments may well have seemed to have cared. Free healthcare within the United Kingdom for the poor as well as the wealthy. As well as the British, the National Health Service has cared for many people who have come to our shores from different nations around the world, these people often have come to the nation looking for a better life, a better job and various other incentives that the United Kingdom can offer. Many are willing to take jobs that us British see below us. A very small percentage may move to the country purely to get help from the health system, but it would only be a small amount, just as a small percentage move here because it is unsafe for them to live in their country anymore, I've met people in that situation before and I've got to say, considering sending these people back to a land where they would surely die shouldn't even cross the minds of people within this country. It's inhumane.

So imagine what I thought when I read a consultant named Professor Thomas writing an article for the Daily Mail, a paper known for scaremongering the people within this country about the Governments plans regarding the NHS for people who are from countries outside the European Union. First of all I was not actually aware of the Governments proposed policy, but secondly this so called Professor's opinion, which I found totally absurd.

The NHS is one of the things this country has got right since the Second World War, that statement could be regarded as opinion, but I would regard it as a fact, even more so when you look over the Atlantic at the United States where healthcare is paid for. You hear stories of people from the USA regarding people who can't afford healthcare. For instance, twenty percent of people did not get the needed specialist care that they required because of the expense. Possibly more worryingly twenty-eight percent of these people who had a chronic medical condition (such as diabetes and heart disease) did not actually fill in their prescription or skipped some of their doses because they couldn't afford for these drugs (Source:UPI.com). Now I'm glad that right now Britain has not gone down a route that America has, my Grandparents are diabetic and luckily thanks to the way we run our healthcare at this current time, they can have regular check-ups and get their prescription, for free thanks to their age. The current prescription cost should they have been under 60 and working is £7.65. Personally I believe prescriptions should be free for all people and not just have groups of people exempt from the cost, however maybe I'm wishing to much from this Government in this economic climate. The fact that some people don't pick up their more expensive prescription in America is genuinely incredibly concerning. People with diabetes who don't get their prescription and take the right doses of insulin for instance can end up in a diabetic coma, which could possibly lead to death, all because healthcare companies have made the price out of these peoples reach. The possibilities of what can happen to people taking medication for heart disease are quite obvious and can also lead to death. Therefore charging beyond reach for anyone isn't humane, it seems like it's an indirect version of manslaughter.

Getting through that then, why should workers outside of the EU be paying for healthcare from this country. Well for a starter, let's say the person comes over from a country like Iraq or Afghanistan, both countries named because we have injured many of their civilians since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. How can we go humanely go to people from these countries and refuse them healthcare. We owe a duty to these people because we decided to go in and bomb their homes, the argument of the legality of either war is invalid in this, the fact that we have injured and killed many people from these countries is however valid. So imagine if we went to these people and charged them £200 of more for their healthcare in this country. It's wrong, especially if they had something severely wrong with them, whether it was picked up before they were in this country or not. Some of these people who settle from foriegn countries have spent so much getting here and trying to find somewhere to live that finding £200 (or more as Professor Thomas would suggest) would be difficult. People from poorer countries may also have big families, having done geography at A Level one of the modules we studied was to do with population, it seems that poorer countries have a higher birth rate (as well as death rate in the majority of these nations), which is why the population of the world is increasing. So for a hypothetical case here, let's argue a family comes over from Egypt, the family isn't well off but has a desire to get away from all the troubles going on with the confused leadership of the country as well as the violence that has seemed to trouble Egypt on and off for the last few years, this family has a father and mother along with four children. This family would have to fork out £1,200 for their healthcare after the struggles and stress of moving over to the UK, pressures such as claiming their visa's, finding a home and actually getting across to the country, all of these not being cheap.

Another issue for people like the family I have created for this point would be the fact that this Government doesn't want to give them benefits, not in the same way as they would give benefits for people who come from the United Kingdom (who have already suffered benefit cuts, regardless of how hard it is to get a job at the moment), so finding the £200 each would be even harder to do, after all these people need to buy food and pay for electricity, water and gas as well. So for some people who move to this country it's making life even harder for them. How is this fair? These people didn't choose to be born in the countries they were born in, some didn't have much choice in leaving and many of these people aren't particularly well off.

And what if these people can find jobs, earn money and pay taxes? Should these people who then would be contributing as much as the working British person have to pay for a service that the people born in the country, or a EU nation get for free? Surely the answer is no. These people are carrying out a job, maybe not for high wages, but still a job and with a job comes tax. The only way it could even be considered fair for these people to have to pay for health care on top of this is if they have a large chunk of their tax taken off, because if they're paying for their healthcare on top then why should they be made to pay taxes that people who get their healthcare without directly paying for it, have to pay to keep the service running? There is no reason for these people to have to pay taxes and a fee. It's simply not fair.

They may have chose to come to the UK because of a reputation of the country being fair, a reputation that lies deep within the foundation of policies such as the National Health Service and Legal Aid. Being a Criminology and Law student I am aware with the cuts surrounding the Legal System as well as these proposed changes to the Health Service. These are two of the areas where Britain made it's name for being a fair country, why should we change these things, things we're proud of?

There is an alternative I can think of, an alternative that wouldn't be popular within the millionaires who sit on their green bench, soon to get a pay rise. The alternative would see either a tax rise for people earning a high bracket of income, or maybe these people would like to pay £200 each extra towards their healthcare, unlike the people that they are actually trying to make pay this money. As for Professor Thomas, I'm sure he can take his scaremongering and use it to encourage Parliament to vote for the richest people in the country to pay more towards their health. If I was in the richest ten or twenty percent I would have no problem paying towards healthcare. You may ask why and I shall answer that. This country should be looking out for everyone within it, now that means the homeless, the people who have settled here from another country and the poor. These people are just as important to the name of Great Britain as those that are rich, whatever profession any of these people are in. If Great Britain stops looking out for these poorer people, whether they come from this land or another, the the Great in Great Britain should not be used anymore.

One thing is for sure, we can all thank the National Health Service for something, the people in many of these hospitals do a great job every day saving many lives. I thank them for this, without them my Uncle would not be around anymore. Therefore I would like to dedicate this blog post to the people that work in these hospitals, the doctors, nurses, receptionists, porters, the lot. I would also like to dedicate this article especially to those at Derriford Hospital, Plymouth who saved my Uncle's life. Thank you.

James' Today - 27/06/2013 - The return of the iMac, Surprises and Wimblegeddon

Hey guys!

Yes I'm back home now and my sister didn't murder me for my typing in the car yesterday, so all is well! I'm sure you will all be celebrating this like the Italians celebrated when they won the 2006 FIFA World Cup (driving around just tooting that horn with flags dragging from the cars, gathering in squares and celebrating together)!

And to make this news even better, my iMac is back from Plymouth and I've set it up again! In fact I'm writing this blog from it now! I have also discovered that I downloaded GTA Vice City, Cricket Captain and Tomb Raider on it. How AWESOME is that?! Gonna keep me going when I've finally finished The Last Of Us...which is an amazing game, so buy it if you have a PS3, if you don't get a PS3 and the game, that is how good it is! I will compile a review of it when I have completed the game and had a bash at multiplayer so, clearly something to look forward to there guys!

So have you went on your computer/mac and found something that you're like "wow I forgot that!"? Or maybe on your games console or Sky Plus box, I seem to remember I found FIFA Street 3 on my 360, may it rest in peace. Now that gave some proper entertainment!

Also in other news, the most ambitious plan ever is going a step further, along with +Danièlle Owen, +Ryan Steppel and +Vikki Lamb I have been looking at a trip around the world visiting a host of places located across the continents. Because I would so definitely watch this on television I believe I have the pleasure to start to send emails to companies for coverage and sponsorship, to make this a reality. Also need funding because Mr Osbourne wants at least the 9kers in Uni to pay back quicker than they were meant to. Unfair right? Well this is a party which includes a lawyer who did 10 hours work and got 5k...I'd be happy is I could get this by working 100 hours! I mean if this was the case we'd be off on the trip when the year ends or the year after aha. But clearly watching 4 novices travel the world would be like, quite good to watch right? Comment below if you have an opinion on that.

And finally, what the hell, I looked at my phone in the car last night and Federer was in a tie break, which he lost, therefore losing the game. Wimbledon's gone strange. Not the same without Rafa and Roger. I shall now need to keep away from watching Murray cry or I'll end up wanting him to win and after all these years that is not good!

Anyway, I know this post is kinda rubbish, but please comment and tweet me and help me find something for tomorrow. I shall now leave you with a song, the first song I played on my Mac when I turned him on. By a headliner at Reading 2013 and no, it isn't that headliner....it's Eminem!