The Chancellor’s callous disregard for social care and the sickening backbench insults tell us clearly to leave the UK behind

Andrew Griffiths - UK Parliament official portraits 2017  469B07F500000578-5107937-Mr_Hammond_and_Mrs_May_found_a_moment_to_laugh_during_Mr_Corbyn_-a-2_1511364877800


The Chancellor had nothing to say about social care in England and Wales despite the much-reported crisis there across the media and in reports by agencies such as Age UK:

‘The social care system in England is in crisis. For many years the system has been severely under-funded.’

Note that this is Age UK talking only about England. See this extract from a comparative study of the four UK NHS areas, reported on the BBC website (!) from February 2017:

‘Out of all the four nations, hospitals in Scotland seem [seem?] to have fared the best.

Weekly data shows four-hour performance in major units hovering around the 90% mark during January.

Much of the credit has been given to the way councils and the health services are working together [Who instructed and funded them so that they could do so?].

Budgets have been pooled [by the Scottish government], encouraging a close working relationship to help get frail patients out of hospital by providing extra rehabilitation services in the community.’

Social care is by no means perfect in Scotland. Such is the ever-growing demand it will never be so but at least the Scottish Government is working hard to make improvements such as these recent two examples reported here

Scottish care workers to receive Living Wage for ‘sleepover’ hours while English care workers receive only the National Minimum Wage.

SNP to bring in free personal care for disabled under-65s by April 2019

In sharp contrast, the Tories have done nothing whatsoever about social care after their ‘dementia tax’ proposals were withdrawn, in a panic, just before the last general election.

All of the above, is for me, sufficient cause to want to get out of Brutal Britannia but seeing the reaction of Tory MPs to Jeremy Corbyn’s attack on the lack of mention of social care in the budget yesterday reminded me that there is a large element in English society with whom we can never be friends. Braying, sniggering and insulting, they revealed their complete lack of empathy and cold sociopathic mindsets as they sprayed offence across the chamber. Tory whip Andrew Griffiths even shouted to suggested that it was Mr Corbyn who should be in care! The actual wording is in dispute. I felt sick. I know they don’t represent all of England, but we have waited long enough for working people in England to abandon these creeps and for the UK Labour Party to deliver a better Britain.

Here’s a thought. For all their faults, could you imagine a Scottish Tory saying such a thing?


8 thoughts on “The Chancellor’s callous disregard for social care and the sickening backbench insults tell us clearly to leave the UK behind

  1. macgilleleabhar November 23, 2017 / 1:45 pm

    Interesting thought provoking post that leads to to me mentioning a passing thought on the Scottish Public Services VAT debacle.
    Despite the Unionist best attempts to put a gloss on it, doesn’t the fact they felt compelled to do this at all suggest that they are under considerable pressure ? It brought Micheal Forsythe’s fruitless return of “The Stone” to mind.


    • johnrobertson834 November 23, 2017 / 2:37 pm

      Oh yes, the stone. Good example. Someone did suggest drilling a hole in it, inserting a shortbread tin bearing Bonnie Prince Charlie’s image and with Bruce’s heart inside, wrapping the whole thing in tartan plaid and then flying over Loch Ness to drop it on the monster, ridding us of pointless or fake symbols of modern Scotland.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Robert Aitken November 24, 2017 / 8:32 pm

        When the stone was returned Magnus Linklater wrote a cringeworthy piece in the times extolling the benefits of this action. I wrote to the Times saying the best thing to do would be to chuck the thing in the North Sea as a modern Scotland had no need of such symbolism. My letter was not published.


      • johnrobertson834 November 25, 2017 / 8:46 am

        At least with social media you can now have some say? Isn’t is possibly a lavvy cover anyway? The monks would’ve have hidden the real thing.


  2. Alasdair Macdonald November 23, 2017 / 6:54 pm

    I believe that the Chancellor, Mr Hammond, made his business through the development of PRIVATE care homes. Of course, having taken up ministerial office his financial holdings will be managed by a blind trust. The kind of social care required will have to be run by public authorities, and paid for by public money, to a great extent. It is likely that the private sector will continue to have a role, but, its employees conditions of service and remuneration will largely be determined by market forces deriving from the expanded public sector. This will mean that profit margins for private care home owners will be severely curtailed. They will still make a profit, but, the scale of the profit will be much more moderate. Nevertheless, they will be viable businesses, but not viable enough in the sense of making huge returns for owners by paying workers the minimum wage.

    Being a believer in free market efficiency and innovation it is unlikely that the Chancellor would promote something which inevitably requires significant public sector provision

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Ludo Thierry November 23, 2017 / 10:11 pm

    Hi John – Hi guys. Confess I knew nothing about this case re. the exorbitant fees being demanded by the Westminster exchequer to have these children – who are born in the UK – registered. (See below from Scottish Legal site):

    Amnesty denounces UK government citizenship fees

    Amnesty International has denounced the UK government’s policy requiring British-born children to register their legal right to citizenship in the UK.

    Amnesty described the policy as “profiteering” and an “outrage” as a hearing into the policy began at the High Court today.

    When Parliament first gave children the right to register as British citizens in 1983, the fee was £35. That figure now stands at £973 – an amount that is effectively preventing hundreds of children from claiming their legal right, the charity said.

    The landmark hearing, being brought by Project for the Registration of Children as British Citizen (PRCBC), will also address the legality of whether the Home Office can refuse to offer a fee waiver or fee reduction to a child who cannot afford the fee.

    If a child does not have citizenship they can be denied free healthcare, the right to work, be barred from renting accommodation, and prevented from applying for loans for higher education.

    The final ruling is expected in the New Year.

    November 23, 2017

    This policy is apparently being applied to UK born children of refugees and migrants. The Westminster midden continues to confound one’s belief that it can’t produce a worse stench. Here’s hoping the Court ruling is a good one.

    Cheers, Ludo

    Liked by 2 people

    • Alasdair Macdonald November 23, 2017 / 11:42 pm

      I would be surprised if PRCBC do not win their case, eventually, on human rights grounds. I suspect that the UK Government would appeal any decisions which go against it as far as the European Courts – the irony!

      However, any readers of a legal bent might be able to give a more rigorous response than mine, which, I must admit, is based on a gut feeling of fairness.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s