From The Evening Standard:
David Cameron attacked the “moral failure” of state-run welfare today as he announced radical plans to use taxpayers' cash to fund charities helping the poorest in society. The Tory leader pledged to match Labour's commitment to eradicating child poverty but said that a Conservative government would use community groups rather than the state to mend “broken Britain”...
Aaargh! The purpose of the welfare state is to keep people above the breadline, no more and no less. If politicians really wanted people to take responsibility for themselves (i.e. stay in a stable marriage, take work when and where they can, save up for a rainy day etc.) all you have to do is replace the entire welfare system with universal flat-rate per-person benefits and restrict income based means-testing to no more than the normal basic rate of tax+Employee's NIC (i.e. currently 31%) or maybe 50% for social tenants (who'd pay an extra 19% of their wages in rent, which enables us to get rid of Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit completely), as well as slashing fraud and error and administration costs to a bare minimum, yippee, hurray!
Moving on:
He also announced that he would appoint charity boss Debbie Scott, who runs the Tomorrow's People group, as a Tory peer.
Aren't we already sick to death of the Labour government appointing their friends and acolytes to the House of Lords and then giving them a job in the Cabinet?
And who are Tomorrow's People anyway? What do they do?
In their 2008 accounts, they claim (page 2) that they 'helped' 12,798 'clients' in the year..."Of the total leavers in the year, 3,081 were on a programme where securing a job was the target outcome and 64% of those leavers secured a positive outcome. A further 850 were helped into training or unpaid voluntary work." So they are a little coy about how many of their 'clients' found a permanent job - a couple of thousand, maybe? It is unknown how many would have found a job anyway, of course.
And how much does this cost?
Page 9: Total income £7,452,252.
I've no idea how much it costs getting a couple of thousand people into work, but it sure as heck ain't £7,452,252 (we could check the accounts of a large recruitment agency like Michael Page for a private sector comparative), so what on earth do they spend it on?
Page 17: Wages and salaries £4,320,542.
And who pays for it?
Page 5: Contract income streams continue as previously and include, amongst others, DWP, the Government Offices for London, the North West and the South West, the London Development Agency, and the London Boroughs ofIslington and Lambeth. Donations received include, amongst others, those from Diageo plc, the Laidlaw Foundation, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Esmee Fairbairn, Rank Foundation, Paradise Foundation and Lady Edwina Grosvenor."
Hands up everybody who still thinks that the Tories will be anything more than marginally less-bad than Labour.
Two Birds, One Stone!
36 minutes ago
7 comments:
Seems to be a remarkable lack of 'hands up' here MW!
Re Debbie Scott - Labour cronyism, Tory cronyism. And the difference is???
Nice post, by the way......
Cracking post, he keeps picking the wrong people, doesn't he.
It'll probably take him till halfway though the parliament to realise that she should be one of yesterday's people.
"Aren't we already sick to death of the Labour government appointing their friends and acolytes to the House of Lords and then giving them a job in the Cabinet?"
Yup! But then, 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss..'
"And who are Tomorrow's People anyway? What do they do?"
Weren't they a bunch of teenagers with psychic powers popular in the 70s?
WFW, JP, thanks.
JM, wasn't that The Partridge Family?
Good post MW!!
The next lot will be exactly the same as the last lot. Nothing will change other than a couple of billion here or there in public spending.
I reckon some headline announcements on getting into office which, when analysed mean the square root of sweet FA.
We need more than a clean sweep of parliament, we need a powerful fire hose.
Jeff
100% spot on. My hand is firmly down.
Although, I guess, marginally less bad is better than nothing.
Also, I'm not sure about DC. He just might surprise us all. I fully expected him to break his pledge to take our MEPs out of the EPP. But he went ahead and did it.
Didn't Cameron moan about Brown's clutch of unelected ministers? Why is he following suit?
So much for Cameron's words - once again, they're just so much hot air.
I expect he'll keep the surveillance/database programmes, too. After all, despite what he says, they originate from the EU.
He'll claim that the matter was out of his hands but he tried his best.
True colours showing!
UKIP's been awfully quiet lately!
Post a Comment