Wednesday, 14 August 2013

Letter 114 If the Coalition confuse a gift to the nation with Party donation it's time to overhaul Party Political funding


Dear Dave and Nick,
Well, it would appear we have reached a new low on the issue of political party funding, gentlemen. Where in Joan Edward's will did she say that you should carve up her bequeathed money for the benefit of the Tory and Lib Dem Parties?
You BOTH campaigned at the last General Election on a cleaner politics ticket. Your interpretation of this money as a Party donation is a perfect example of why we need to overhaul Party Political funding. 
Now might be a very good time to get your chequebooks out; that money was a gift to the nation, not your Party coffers. Only a cad would see it any other way.

Yours etc,
PS Stuck for ideas where the money SHOULD go? Try these: Shelter, Help for Heroes, NSPCC, Oxfam, Help theAged, Make a Wish Foundation, Lucy Faithful Foundation, CAB, Unemployment Centres, Youth Centres, NACRO, a community grants pot, Credit Unions, training nurses...

Wednesday, 7 August 2013

Letter 113: Housing crisis & housing bubble, potentially fuelled by Help to Buy


"Dear Dave,
Do you like camping? All that fresh air, sitting out under the stars, greeting the dawn - kind of romantic. Unless of course, you don't get to go home. Then the damp and no real access to home comforts start to get a bit tedious. Well, more than tedious, pretty soul destroying, I would imagine. Which brings us to an awful story I came across whilst catching up on the UK's current housing crisis. It's hard to believe, but there are homeless people in Stockport who are reduced to living in caves. How disgraceful in a country as rich as ours. Someone ought to do something to help them, however difficult it is right now, with homelessness reaching a five year high. Just not a Help-to-Buy scheme, eh? That would be madness, in so many ways. And let's not count the ways, seeing as Graeme Leach, Albert Edwards, Vince Cable and Fitch Ratings have been so eloquent in their condemnation. Surely the real problem we have is the number of houses there actually are, rather than the difficulty people find in buying one (or two).  

Yours, etc

PS, One final query: how do you think the re emergence of sub prime mortgages (in the wake of your Funding for Lending scheme) will help the homeless, housing market and taxpayer?"


Thursday, 25 July 2013

Letter 112: Cameron and Lynton Crosby's Lobbying Row Upstages the Royal Birth


"Dear Dave,
I have not watched the Andrew Marr interview this week, where you were repeatedly questioned about Lynton Crosby and plain packaging, but I have been reading the papers. Despite good news of royal births and the questionable changes to the internet proposed by you, the lobbying issue hasn't really gone away. There, Lynton and yourself are, standing centre stage, issuing denials (or not, as the case may be) while Sheila Gunn, former spin doctor to John Major expresses the opinion that all is not what it seems. Very confusing. To make matters worse, it's been uncovered that Mr Crosby has also advised private healthcare providers on the best ways to exploit perceived failings in the NHS. And what's this about his connections to lobbying on behalf of the fracking industry?

As I have previously mentioned, you have been described  as:
"A man who has made transparency not just a political philosophy but a personal credo over the last few years", but I remain unconvinced. If what I've read is true, your plans for a register of lobbyists would allow Lynton Crosby to keep his clients secret.
So how about you put your money where your mouth is? In honour of that transparency you claim to cherish, and in order that we can rule out any conflict of interest, might now be a good time to
publish your Australian strategist's FULL client list?
With best wishes, etc"



Saturday, 20 July 2013

Letter 111:Privatisation and NHS; lock everything up, the Tories are in charge.




"Dear Dave,
So you've finally done it, sold off our NHS plasma supplier (or 80% of it) and sneaked the announcement out just as Parliament went into recess. So much once again for transparency and for "no decision about me without me". 
Is this how you think the trust of voters is earned? By selling such a precious, integral service to Bain Capital, a US private equity firm co-founded by Mit Romney  which has a reputation for aggressive asset stripping? According to Dr Lucy Reynolds who works at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, your deal undervalued the company. Earlier this year she wrote an academic paper strongly arguing against the sale of PRUK. She has said:
"Plasma supplies have a long record of being operated on a not for profit basis, using voluntary donors where all the necessary checks take place. The difference with a commercial firm is that they will want to have as many donors as possible and be looking to secure large profits first and foremost.This amounts to the government abandoning UK blood products users to the tender mercies of the cheapest supplier."

Is she correct in saying that there isn't any mechanism to protect the interests of UK users from harm caused by the change of ownership?  Did Lord Owen's advice mean nothing to you? 
Of course, this is entirely predictable. Your Government scapegoats doctors and nurses on a weekly basis for funding and organisational failures within the NHS. Isn't that also an attempt to undermine public confidence, running down the service so it can be outsourced or privatised more easily? The orthodoxy that Tories can never get ahead of Labour on the NHS has too many strands to it, to be simply brushed away by Jeremy Hunt using Sir Bruce Keogh's review as a political football, attempting to smear both the Opposition and the NHS in Parliament this week. But there's too much distrust for Jeremy to scapegoat away, full stop. Voters love the NHS and with good reason, so to trust the Tories with it seems idiotic, especially when 13% of your Party funding comes from the Private Health sector. Or when so many Tory MPs stand to gain financially from the outsourcing of NHS services to the private sector. If you factor in A&E waiting times, the possible unsustainability of the NHS 111 service, and the expansion of privatised services in NHS hospitals, it's clear: 
ON THE  NHS YOUR ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN YOUR WORDS. 
        Much, much louder.
Yours, etc"

Sunday, 14 July 2013

Letter 110: Transparency, gone up in a puff of smoke


Dear Dave,
Dearie me. First Andy Coulson, now Lynton Crosby. Pure coincidence I'm sure, but once again, it does appear that money talks for your Conservative led government. How worrying that the interests of big business takes priority over the health of our children.Whatever happened to your pre election promise of cleaning up politics?Transparently, it's disappearing like a puff of smoke... 
Yours, etc

List of ingredients found in cigarettes:
Acetone (solvent)
*Naphtylamine
Methanol (used as rocket fuel)
*Pyrene
Naphtalene (moth repellant)
Nicotine (used as a herbicide and insecticide)
*Cadmium (used in batteries)
Vinyl chloride (used in plastic materials)
Carbon monoxide (found in exhaust fumes)
Cyanhydric acid (was used in gas chambers)
Ammoniac (detergent)
*Urethane
Toluane (industrial solvent)
Arsenic (lethal poison)
*Dibenzacridine
*Polonium 210 (a radioactive element)
DDT (insecticide)

*known carcinogenic substances "

Friday, 12 July 2013

Letter 109: MPs salaries, even without a rise are an embarrassment of riches.


"Dear Dave, 
Ever shopped in Iceland? Aldi? Scoured the supermarket's reduced aisle, not because it's fun to nab a bargain, but because you were down to your last quid, days before the next paycheque? Or have you visited a food bank because Sam had to forgo breakfast, dinner or supper (or even all three) so that your children had enough to eat? No... that would be silly, your wife earns a very good income as do you. 

I can see IPSA's suggestion that MPs salaries should increase by 11% is more than a little embarrassing, especially when you realise that in the three months since your Government's welfare changes took place the number of people being fed by foodbanks has increased by 200%. Are subsidised forks ever put down in Westminster long enough to consider that there may come a time when people will have had enough of the inequality? In just one foodbank, (Sparkhill, Birmingham), ONE TON of food is required by the desperate PER week, some of whom are working people, referred for food parcels because their wages cannot meet family need. Not surprising, with food costs up 27%, gas/electricity up 15% and wages rising at only 1%. Maybe in George's spirit of  "all being in this together", MPs would like to share their £5.7m taxpayer bankrolled "hardship fund" with some of these families?
What to do though and which to tackle first? PR, posturing, or public concern? I have watched with wry amusement as MPs, yourself included, speak of personal discomfort accepting an 11% pay increase in such hard economic times. But you miss the point, made most ably in this article:
which I suggest you read, despite how much it may make you squirm.Why not print it off and nail it to one of Westminster's many subsidised dining rooms walls for the hell of it? Then MPs can see what voters know. Your pay does not need to be increased, and noble suggestions to manage within the current system ring very hollow. Most people rightly feel that the gravy currently flowing freely on the Parliamentary train should be most definitely rationed, rather than rationalised as IPSA suggests. MP's salaries, even without a rise, are an embarrassment of riches, especially as foodbanks mushroom on your watch in a way even Labour can't take credit for. 
Yours, etc" 
               



Monday, 24 June 2013

Letter 108: Does money from Tax Havens shore up the Tory party?


"Dear Dave,
I've read somewhere that nearly three quarters of top Tory donors are linked to tax havens. Is that true? How disappointing for tax paying voters if so. Have your donors not heard that you've been incredibly busy this week promoting "the Three Ts" at the G8? Maybe they don't care. Will you MAKE them care, telling them you don't want their donation unless they stop using tax havens? Or maybe you could point out that there'd be no need for those unpopular austerity measures - if only everyone would pay their taxes evaded or avoided. In full. Here. Without resort to creative accounting.

And if that doesn't work, George and yourself could always point out that though using and benefitting from tax havens is legal, it's hardly ethical....

With best wishes, etc"