POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

It was grossly insulting and totally thoughtless. Betrays a mind set... (All poor people are lazy and feckless....)
Bernard Shaw once made a speech to the Fabians that started; "I hate the poor...." He went on to say that he wanted to abolish them by giving them a living wage.

[Bruff]

The charming part of the Mr Shapps' (aka Mr Green, aka Mr Fox) tweet was as others have said the use of the word 'they'. 'They' like beer and bingo; 'we' like country suppers and Ladies Day at Ascot. It tells you everything you need to know.

Readers of a certain age may wish to know that Mr Shapps/Green/Fox is the cousin of The Clash and Big Audio Dynamite songwriter/guitarist Mick Jones.

Not to be outdone and to keep up the good work, the Lord Tebbit has pronounced that people spend their money on junk food and then rely on charity food banks for the rest. He also noted that there was 'near infinite' demand for valuable goods given away free. Well, I've touched on this but anyway: speak for yourself Norman. There may very well be 'infinite demand' for valuable goods available free among the sharp-elbowed, self-centred, out-for-themselves-and-beggar-the rest avaracious. You know, the sort who at a reception, with a free buffet, hoover up three plate loads and then pile a couple of plate loads more into their bags 'for supper'. But the rest of us generally have our fill and no more - enough is after all, as good as a feast.

As for those forced to the food bank a maximum 3-times a year, very many are likely crippled with shame.

Richard Broughton

[Stanley]

From your mouth to God's ear.... Here's a LINK to the Guardian's take on the Shapps tweet.
There is also the strange case of Mr Gove and his diatribe against Old Etonians. Could this have anything to do with the fact that he is officially an oik as he didn't get into the hallowed halls? Could it have anything to do with positioning himself for a leadership contest?

[Tizer]

Also I worry when the finance experts applaud the freedom to take a pension pot as cash, could it be that they see the opportunity for getting their sticky little fingers on some of it? One thing seems certain, annuities will be more expensive.

I was very surprised to see the Government abolishing the obligation to buy an annuity with our pension funds without at the same time taking action to ensure that people still reserve money for their old age. It's going to lead to a lot of trouble, partly because many folk will be tempted by the ability to spend and others will feel forced to spend to pay off their debts - and, as you say' the `sticky finger brigade' will be chasing them for it. The fall in share price of the insurance companies was a knee jerk reaction and I'm sure they'll be breaking open the champagne while planning all the ways they can con us out of the money.

[Tripps]

The best comment I've seen so far on this topic is

"What were the reasons that the compulsory purchase of an annuity was mandatory - and what has changed?"

Just my opinion, but this looks totally cynical, and political. By April 2015 the flood of easy money from payment protection insurance refunds, and whiplash claims will be drying up so they release an enormous new stream of money. Weasel words are in abundance. Sure, those with enormous pension pots will do the right thing, but if the amount is in the low tens of thousands it will surely be swiftly cashed in.

" No pockets in shrouds" will be heard throughout the land.

[Stanley]

Brilliant David, even cynical old me hadn't thought of that one.... Whether it's correct or not makes no difference because the ensuing flood of money circulating through the economy and particularly via the 'financial advisers' will be enormous and I have no doubt that Tiz is correct, the 'cunning wheeze' departments will be burning the midnight oil. One thing is certain, I kicked and screamed when I was forced to take my annuity early under Treasury Rules but with hindsight they did me a favour. I simply did it with Pearl, taking the 3% annual increase option, the company I was with and as far as I can see I got a far better deal than I would today.
My brain can't make moss nor sand of the calculators on the web so help me out. Assume my initial monthly pension payment under an annuity is £100 a month. Compound interest at 3% calculated at the end of each year. How much will the monthly payment be after a) 25 years and b) 36 years?

[plaques]

Stanley you're a rich man.
After 25 years each £ of pension will have doubled, actually £2.09.
After 36 years each £ of pension will have nearly trebled, actually £2.90.

Of course if you take inflation at 2% its £1.28 & £1.43.
But if you look at the main basic inflation of food etc at 5% you are losing by £1.64 & £2.04.on each £ of pension.

Forget the figures just enjoy retirement.

[Tizer]

Spot on, Tripps! They've discovered indirect, crafty ways of flooding money into the economy and it's only when you look at the path taken by the money that you realise it's going around in circles. It isn't `new' money, it's just our money being taken off us and then given back, but it encourages spending and makes the economy look buoyant. Guess what, the Emperor's got new clothes...yet again. And Stanley's right about the cunning wheezes, we'll see a flood of those too.

Another little thing that's bothering me at the moment...For many years now some of us have been warning that cosying up to, and becoming dependent on, countries like Russia and China would lead to trouble. Well, the chickens have come home to roost. We need Russian energy, Russian food, Russian materials, and Putin is laughing at our gullibility and snatching the Crimea. I can imagine a cartoon of an express train, hammer & sickle on the front, and Putin in a guard's uniform and shouting "Next stop, Lithuania, then Latvia, then..."

[Stanley]

Thanks P. That fits with what's happened to date, 14 years after taking the annuity it's grown by about 50%. All I have to do is live long enough to bankrupt them!
"Another little thing that's bothering me at the moment..." Dead right Tiz. For years I have been saying that politicians are the worst people to make decisions on anything that demands long term thinking and policies, their mind set is short term and whenever a major problem looms they tend to kick the can down the road. See PFI etc.... Meanwhile we spend billions on useless aircraft carriers and Trident. I remember Wedgie Benn arguing that windfall profits from North Sea Oil should be ring-fenced and applied to infrastructure and vital social services. Thatcher and the Mad Monk immediately saw a far better immediate use for it, finance a pool of unemployment, run down smoke stack industry and bring the unions to heel. Those are some of the pigeons that are coming home to roost at the moment. Does anyone really believe that the new nuclear power stations will come on line early enough to avoid power cuts? Or could it be that an alternative strategy of fracking and another 'dash for gas' will be needed to avoid energy starvation? Think back to Bevan and his 'commanding heights of the economy'. We have abdicated control of all of them including the ability to tax profits made in the UK by allowing loopholes that mean that they can be exported off shore. Don't get me going......!
By the way, don't fall into the trap of branding this thinking as Marxist rhetoric, read Harold Macmillan's 'Middle Way' published in the 1930s and you'll find he advocated the same thing but using different language. It's simple commercial and economic sense.

[Stanley]

Have a look at this excellent and well written report on the latest discussions about NET MIGRATION. Particularly telling is the reference to the die hard Tories trying to outdo UKIP in the debate. Nice to see that the reasonable voices include Members from all parties. Inward migration has been an asset for centuries, the present opposition to it is pandering to the 'Little Englanders' and racist tendencies, it is high time they were dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

[Stanley]

Watching the Ukraine situation I can't help reflecting that Putin has played a blinder. This is not to say I agree with the Russian takeover of Crimea but simply the fact that he made an assessment, seized the opportunity and is now cementing what is a fait accompli by talking to President Obama about ways to stabilise the situation. His bargaining card of course is the Russian forces massed on the borders of Eastern Ukraine. Game set and match to Russia I think. Pure bullying colonialism.

[Pluggy]

A slight twist is the 'kangaroo referendum' (patent pending ) and the fact that most Crimeans want to be Russian.

[Stanley]

Things are looking a bit messy in Westminster. I won't even bother going into detail. It's a tragedy for the country, we expect more from our politicians and their friends.
Panorama last night highlighted the concerns about the elected mayor of Tower Hamlets Luftur Rahman (LINK). Regular Private Eye readers will not be surprised by any of this as PE has been reporting on this for months.

[plaques]

I see that George Osborne is now promising full employment.
" to have more people working than any of the other countries in the G7 group".
Leaving aside the down grade from G8 to G7, there's an awful lot of people in America. Can we look forward to a massive immigration boom?
Of course he didn't mean this. But what did he mean?

[Tardis]

Andrew Stephenson is still in hospital following his emergency appendectomy

[Stanley]

P. Same question that was going through my head. Also, what is the use of 'full employment' if half the jobs don't pay a living wage? Would someone really migrate for a zero-hours contract?
Listening to the spat over the obscene profits made out of the Royal Mail sell off what struck me was that while the protesters have a point, what concerns me is that it was put on the market in the first place. Why sell something that is in profit? Could the answer be that it divests responsibility? The downside, as in all these privatisations of the commending heights is that we lose control. Neither good business or good governance.

[Stanley]

Yesterday in Parliament David Cameron got out of a tight corner when asked by Ed Milliband why the 'gentleman's agreement' not to sell RM shares had been broken in a sale nobody but the fat cats wanted by using a direct lie, that the privatisation was in the Labour Manifesto. This has been proved to be false but no signs of Cameron admitting it. Dirty politics....

[Stanley]

See this LINK for a report about Maria Miller and her mortgage claim fiddle. She has been ordered to pay back £5,800 and not the whole £45,000 as recommended by the Parliamentary Standards Committee. First question is Why? Second question is what would have happened to a benefit fraudster who hadn't got the protection of David Cameron? Is this a fair and unbiased system?

[Stanley]

See this LINK for a story that doesn't seem to be going away despite Grant Shapps saying that there was "nowhere else for it to go". This has gone beyond being a 'get the government' story. MPs of all parties are worried by the fact that public perception is that the MP's have marked their own homework and given themselves a pass, ignoring the recommendation of the Standards Committee. There are calls now for the final verdict to be adjudicated by an independent body.
The big question is of course Mr Cameron's judgement. His old chums mentality automatically overrides common sense in these matters. It is quite obvious that Maria Miller not only fiddled the system but used her position re. the Leveson enquiry to attempt to strong arm the editor of the Telegraph. Her 'apology' was contemptuous, she never actually admitted anything or said she was sorry. Regardless of whether she goes or not, this affair ignites the expenses debate again and some of the public will remember in 2015.

[hartley353]

There has already been a public opinion pole on Maria Miller, she has to go, and go she will. A totally despicable person who's self belief that she has friends in high places is misplaced. Cameron has been judged and found wanting, he must be looking over his shoulder now.

[plaques]

I've seen managers frog marched out of the building with their belongings in a dustbin liner for lying about their expenses. People appreciate strong management in cases like this. Mr Cameron and his spin doctors have come unstuck on this one. The longer it runs the worse it will get.

[Stanley]

It's getting serious when the Noble Lord from Chingford says she must go.
P. They are like many other people these days, they live in a parallel universe untouched by the sanctions that apply to ordinary mortals. I heard an MP last night saying that allowing outside bodies to govern MPs would strike at the roots of the constitution and freedom of parliament. Same argument used by the bankers actually..... It's about time we tried it anyway!

[Stanley]

Dennis Skinner asked: "How do you solve a problem called Maria?"
Reports this morning that the chairman of the 1922 committee has seen Cameron and insisted she should resign. (LINK)
The British Chambers of Commerce voice doubts about the strength of the 'recovery'. (LINK)

[Tripps]

This is the best and most complete version of the Maria Miller saga that I have seen.Maria Miller

This excerpt may explain Mr Cameron's reluctance to take any action.

And David Cameron, the Prime Minister himself, who has for years been getting us to pay the interest on a £350,000 mortgage when he has a mortgage-free home in Kensington rented out at massive profit, and two free houses while he’s Prime Minister.

She'll have to go of course, they're probably inventing the cover story as we speak.

[Stanley]

They've just announced that she has resigned David.