Thursday, 17 March 2016

Life goes on...another day.

It would seem that the U.K's present government is having some difficulty in convincing a growing number of their loyal subjects/citizens that the policies that they are trying to enact are actually in the interest of the greater good of the nation.
It seems, also, that the main aim of our glorious Chancellor of the Exchequer is to reduce and finally eliminate the National Debt.
It is a crying shame then, that according to reports, this National Debt is now standing at a level that most self-respecting persons would at least be raising an eyebrow and emitting a sigh as well...or maybe even a death-rattle.
When the Tories managed to get back into power, they stated that this reduction was their aim.
Citing that this debt was mainly because of those  "damned socialists " and their " profligate spending  ".
Monies spent on schemes that the Tories viewed as unnecessary such as the Surestart Scheme for pre-school education.
Somehow this had managed to cause the National Debt to reach a figure just shy of half a billion pounds.
Apparently, this was a good enough reason for the incoming Tories to attempt to implement further swingeing cuts to other schemes that benefitted the less able.
 They chose to continue the revision of the Social Security system that the previous, putatively socialist, government had introduced.
They not only continued implementing this plan, but also extended the definition of the term 'disabled' to include anyone not in gainful employment, a sort of " Tory++wiv extra bollocks " kind of plan, that seemed to be veering closer to some kind of pale imitation of an " AktionT4 " scheme.
The Tories also chose to ignore that the previous Labour administration had actually managed to REDUCE the National Debt and actually tried to make some political capital from a witty note that allegedly stated that the Treasury coffers were empty.
It would seem that existence of this note and the alleged mismanagement by the previous regime/administration could have provided them with some form of justification to both continue and intensify the reforms to the social security that had been initiated by the previous administration.
They certainly did intensify the task of recouping the monies that had, allegedly, been given out in such a profligate manner.
They even published 'statistics' that 'proved' that the monies paid out to service this function accounted for something like twenty-five percent of Government expenditure.
It was soon revealed that the figure was actually zero point seven (0.7 ) of one percent ( 1% ) of Government Expenditure.
OOPS! A bit of a bollock-drop there!
Maybe our " Glorious Leaders " were actually doing nothing more than " playing to form " because, after all, the Tories gained this sobriquet of " Tory " after performing a " Land Grab " in the island of Ireland sometime in the eighteenth century.
The word is taken from the  Irish ( or maybe Gaelic ) used to describe a particular kind of robber who was merciless in the execution of their acts of thievery.
This became especially noticeable with the publication of the statistics published by Department for Work and Pensions after numerous Freedom of Information requests, most noticeably by Mike Sivier ( who administers the " Vox Political " blog/Facebook site )on the statistics regarding the number of people who had died after claiming Employment and Support Allowance, Incapacity Benefit or Severe Disablement Allowance.
The information that was released was, as was to be expected, almost opaque, being full of so many caveats and other obfuscations.
Perhaps our " Lords and masters " were of the opinion that, by using such opaque information that 'bullshit would baffle the brains of us lowly types. Because, as is often stated, that statistics should really be read by people who have the ability to understand them.
It was unfortunate then, for the Government at least, that some very learned person cast their eyes over the information
and soon separated the wheat from the chaff and were only too glad to make the relevant information available to the rest of us.
Did the presentation of this evidence to the contrary to HMG's statement cause it to rush out anything like an explanation?
It did not.
The ship of state sails blithely on, oblivious to the possibility of any course other than the one that it seems to be set up on.

No comments: