Spanish Anti-Abortion Move

Out with the old and in with the new? Well, not for Spain.

An abortion policy that really ought to have been condemned to the history books is soon to be revived, if Spain’s ‘Popular Party’ have their way.

The Socialism of the previous Government is the antithesis of the Popular Party. There is no room for what was. The right wing ruling machine have opted for a ‘clean’ slate’, well, if you consider corruption in economic dealings and social injustice per se, a clean slate.

Apparently, Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy has drawn his inspiration for tougher abortion laws from the Catholic Church. He is happy to publicly allay himself with the moral and ethical ‘standards’ of this religion. Well, just like in religion, adopting double standards never hurt the cause; just those following it.

So, the plan is to reinstate an outdated abortion law which keeps the religious elements appeased (70% of Spainish claim to be Catholic). The law will state that abortion will be deemed acceptable, only, in cases of rape (Spainish law is also outdated concerning this too), and if the Mother or child will suffer severe health risks.

However, laying stake to such a high moral ground seems perculiar, especially upon knowing the sexualisation within Spanish culture. Sexually transmitted infections are on the increase, affairs are common place, prostitution is ignored, couples are extremely intimate in public places, sex and nudity advertises everything, oh, and women dress scantily clad. Spanish culture is hardly demure and reserved.

So, what can such a restricted abortion law achieve?!

Seems to me as though Spain is a country with conflicting morals; two and two doesn’t necessarily make four.

To make the serious issue of abortion, the rights and freedoms of women worse, Pro-Life organisations have become involved in the mix too. 250,000 plus supporters have protested and petitioned.

One such protester, Ana Maria Llera de la Torre, spokeswoman for Adevida-Jaen Pro-Life Association told the press proudly that her organisation agreed with the Governments proposals to tighten abortion laws. She said in a recently interview; “We want to say yes to life, say yes to the birth of a son”. Ummm, how interesting. Perhaps then, Ms. Torre and her archaic attitude, would be far more sympathetic, and extend the offer of an abortion to those expectant Mothers carrying a girl child?

Such nonsensical attacks on rights, and more specifically rights of women, at this moment in time make sense; consider the economic troubles in Spain. A Government needs to be seen attempting to appease the electorate, so what better way than stamping on the vulnerable. These type of drastic and alienating policy changes are seemingly the only ones this Government is capable of making. They are reactionary, and to be honest not worth the paper it will be written upon. When so much needs to be done, abortion (for or against) is not an issue which will keep the country poor for years to come.

Priorities, por favor!

Is It Fair?????

What else meant to help the public can be eradicated by the UK coalition Government??

What more can the economic strife demand??

Council Tax Benefit might be a THING OF THE PAST very soon. Everyone will HAVE TO contribute something towards their own Council Tax, EVEN those on the lowest of incomes or on benefits. So, regardless of circumstances, ANYONE living in any housing within the UK will be paying something. The ONLY EXEMPTION to remain in place will be for the elderly (pensioners).

COUNCIL TAX (for those of you lucky enough not it know) is a:

Tax levied on households by local authorities; based on the estimated value of the property and the number of people living in it.

Is this lift on council tax benefit fair when some people clearly won’t be able to pay ANYTHING towards such a tax?

What will be the point in the Government ENFORCING such rules, if people can’t pay the tax?

What resources will be WASTED trying to ensure these people comply and do pay up?

Take a look at the link below from The Guardian newspaper for some more info.

UK Council Benefit Cuts

A Job Is A Job…………

Above picture from Morbid Anatomy website.

A 19 year old who had been desperately searching for work in Germany received unexpected confirmation from the Labour Office; they had secured a job for her. You might be thinking a job as a; shop assistant, administrator, bank clerk, in a factory or a million other different jobs; but NO, this girl was told to begin work in a brothel.

Yes, that is correct a brothel.

A waitress at a brothel to be more precise. This was the job the teen was offered, or at least was told she WOULD DO, as opposed to the housekeeping job she had been hoping to find.

Great prospects for any 19  year old to aspire to, working in a brothel.

OK, prostitution is legal in Germany, but nevertheless a quick enquiry to discover if this ‘career option’ was what the teen wanted, would have brought back a resounding NO! Just because something is legal doesn’t mean everyone agrees with it, or wants to be part of it.

I soon began to wonder; because prostitution is legal, and the person looking for a job happened to be a young girl, whether the Labour Office automatically thought the teenager would be OK working in that type of environment????

After all she is a woman, and that is what a woman is for – to serve, for sex and pleasure. Therefore, a brothel would be ideal for any woman to work in. Why wouldn’t a woman want to work there?!

Yet, perhaps the Labour Office just think of this as a job; something better than nothing??????

The teenager has refused the job, so I wondered what people thought about this???? Refusing work in this rough economic climate, a job is a job after all right??????? Any port in a storm to survive??????

Yet,  Should anyone force you to accept a job that goes against your morals, ethics, ideals and standards????

Could you suspend what you felt and believed to work in such a place????????

Perhaps you think a brothel and prostitution is great career choice???????

OPINIONS PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This Is Controversial

Controversially the UK is once again defending their rights to control their own boarders against mounting pressure to conform to the wishes of the EU.

This time the EU are arguing that the UK have no right to limit the rights of Romanian and Bulgarian citizens who wish to go to the UK to; work, to be housed, to have access to education, benefits and health care services.

Under EU law the UK is obliged to restrict its restrictions on immigration; the doors of the UK should not have to be prized open by all who wish to go and live there.

However there are restrictions currently in place; 29 million Romanian and Bulgarian workers have not been granted free access to live and work within the UK. These restrictions are due to expire in 2014, and now the renewal of this immigration policy is under debate; should controls against these workers wanting to go to the UK be continued or scraped??

Well, the UK Government, and a portion of the public aren’t so sure they should open the doors to the UK that wide, quite so soon. PR campaigns are even being considered by the UK Government to dissuade people from wanting to go to the UK to live and work.

There is a fear that millions of migrant workers will flood into the UK, this has prompted deep concerns for the country.

However, this is not a new argument though. It is one that has been raging in many formats since the beginning of the EU and even before that. It seems that the UK have always been rebuked for their ‘closed’ attitude toward welcoming foreign workers. Yet, since history was first documented people have come to live in the UK as migrant workers; in essence it is nothing new for the UK.

So what makes this situation different?

What is the truth behind all these restrictions, and why is it that people want to see them continue???

Why are the UK Government, and a portion of the UK public against opening the ‘flood gates’ (so to speak) to the whole of the EU???

Well immigration is, as always, a complex topic littered with speculation. The speculation concerns the exact numbers of immigrant workers who will decide to come to the UK. People wonder what this influx of immigration will bring about for the UK; how will it affect the economy and society at this moment in time.

There is a fear too; that the UK will flounder as a consequence of mass immigration. A fear that also expressing concerns over large scale immigration from one country to another would result in condemnation, and misinterpretation.

With David Cameron talking about a referendum relating to how the UK public view the UK’s future in the EU; it is perhaps quite pertinent that these new immigration arguments correspond with claims over EU manipulation and control.

Everyone is wondering just how far the UK are willing to push their individual idea about immigration. Will stand alone or merely just concede to what the EU want in the end?

So, we are now getting to the point of the real controversy; racism.

A word so often applied when immigration is discussed, and likely to be labelled upon anyone raising their voices against unregulated immigration.

Yet, race or being prejudiced against people isn’t necessarily the reason the UK are voicing opposition towards immigration. It isn’t immigration they are against per se, but the unrestricted version of this, one without controls. At the end of the day we are all subject to controls when we travel or go to live in another country; none of us are completely free to wander as we wish. So, removing controls or being told to remove the controls could be seen as unknown territory. There is always a chance that with any proposed changes to any policies, there will be unseen consequences or outcomes. In reaction to change these unknown elements are thought through thoroughly and discussed, before anything new is ever implemented.

Is this reaction racism at play, or merely politics – manoeuvring to achieve the best deal? 

Racism regarding UK immigration controls cannot be fully proven, unless you are willing to consider the rhetoric of any UK National party; which I AM NOT GOING TO, AS THEY TALK ABSOLUTE NONSENSE.

The UK might be be criticised as a country selfishly looking after its own business or interests, by denying loosening its immigration controls. The UK could be seen as ignoring the needs and rights of other EU countries and their people. Yet, there are fears in the UK that with added pressures to take more migrant workers, the UK economy will crash into obscurity, and financial ruin will follow.

How can such a tiny island stay afloat?

The UK is currently suffering cuts to its health, education and public service budgets (including the police force and teachers). The economy isn’t flush; there are hundreds of thousands homeless upon the streets, 3 million people are unemployed and more being made redundant weekly it seems; people are basically struggling to pay their way and put food on the table. In fact figures show that as long ago as 2008/2009 13.5 million people were actually living below the low income threshold – which is under £300 a week (according to poverty.org.uk).

In truth the UK doesn’t have endless resources, available land for new homes, and unlimited access to services, plenty of money or jobs for everyone. It doesn’t have enough of those things for the citizens it already has. The UK needs improving for sure, and overloading it with more weight it cannot carry won’t help.

So why would anyone want to come to an already struggling country to work and live?

If people want to leave their own countries en masse in favour of any other EU country, then surely the issue is with their country of origin??? Surely that should be addressed by the EU, as there must be something fundamentally amiss in that country? Something which is failing their citizens, and forcing them to feel they have to leave to seek a better life elsewhere in the EU?

Should the UK or any other country feel obliged to take in immigrant workers from other EU countries???

Is it the UK or any other countries responsibility to do so?????

Might seem controversial to ask these questions, and yet, this is what people are saying behind closed doors. 

I don’t claim to have any of the answers – have you?

The UK has plenty of issues that need to be addressed, so, I ask again; what can the UK offer to any people from any other country, when it has so many issues of its own?

If people leave their home countries in search of a better life, that is fine and totally expected; but what better life do people expect to find in the UK?? What freedoms, incentives and privileges do other countries think the UK has to offer them that their country of origin doesn’t??

Resettling in any country where people can gain access to public services, jobs, a benefit system, a criminal prosecution service, to education, to better housing and to health care; has to be a good thing and appealing. The UK like many EU countries has all of these on offer for its citizens.

BUT,  not every country does, or if they do, these services aren’t always to the same standard as they might be in the UK.

So maybe it is these things that offers hope to people who wish to go to the UK to live??

Yet, now maybe not the best time to move anywhere within the EU, as things aren’t as good in every country as perhaps they once were. Consequently, many countries it maybe considering their own needs first, and not considering allowing more people into their countries. At this moment in time, in this economic climate, surely that is quite normal, sensible and healthy?!

Perhaps it is a case of sustain and redevelop what you already have??? Don’t gamble and don’t risk any more  or face upsetting the fine balance and making things worse for those already living in the country???

Caution around immigration is not only on the UK’s mind, so to see the UK as the enemy on this is unfair.

Other countries have far more stringent immigration policies than the UK, yet, they are not deemed to be doing anything wrong. These countries also consider their own interests, business and economy first and foremost; yet, they aren’t being called selfish and being reprimanded for not helping.

Perhaps now is not the right time to consider being lax over immigration??????????

Yet, no country could deny the benefits they have received from this either, and no one should feel they can’t re-locate to em-better their lives.

So, to sum up then; immigration has always been an issue. It is controversial topic and a tough policy to get right. It is on every countries mind, and in every countries interest to allow and also to ‘vet’. Yet, now it is ever more becoming a thorn in countries and Governments sides – to do is to be damned and to not do is to be damned.

So what are the options????

OPINIONS PLEASE!!!!!!!!!

I was just wondering what you think about immigration????

Has any country got immigration policy right????

Can there ever be a balance achieved???

Is it wrong and selfish to limit immigration???

Are the UK xenophobic????  

Alternatively; is the UK in control their own country, or is it the EU in control?

Why can’t the UK call its own shots??  

Why does the EU insist in ‘putting their fingers’ in the UK’s pie?? Reprimanding the UK for looking after itself, just exactly like other EU countries do.

YOU TELL ME……………….

Check out links below from UK media for further reading on this topic:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9835068/50000-children-overseas-getting-child-benefit-and-tax-credit-Treasury-admits.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/romanian-beggars-flooding-london-7675625.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8707490/Gang-of-Romanian-gipsy-squatters-targeted-several-houses.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/more-women-forced-into-slavery-after-change-to-immigration-law-8478998.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9840059/Why-Poles-love-coming-to-Britain.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_Kingdom_since_1922

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_in_the_United_Kingdom

Should The British Be Ashamed Of Being British?

Over worked and underpaid???? Ashamed to be British when all said and done???

I read an article stating that British MPs are dissatisfied with their salaries. These MPs weren’t willing to go public with this dissatisfaction, I wonder why? No, this ‘poll’ was conducted in secrecy, and this secrecy allowed MPs to answer honestly (for once). However, the results were revealed; though unfortunately NONE of the MPs names were provided!

69% of MPs believe they deserve a 32% wage increase.

Shock and horror!!!!

Who would have guessed that MPs, people in power, want MORE! Doesn’t matter what state the UK is in or how the people flounder; as long as they are OK, they don’t give a damn about anything or anyone else. Democracy at its finest!

A reality check perhaps is required. I would love to see them actually working for a minimum wage, without expenses. Then maybe they’d get the gist of the Hell they put everyone else through. That or maybe something more drastic!

Anyway, a response to this revelation was that people have said that they feel ashamed of being British. Britain is seen as the joke of the world.

I wondered, is that true or just us Brits paranoia kicking in??

So, I ask all of you out there who may wish to voice an opinion on this;

ARE YOU ASHAMED TO BE BRITISH??????

SHOULD THE BRITS BE ASHAMED OF BEING BRITISH??????

IS BRITAIN A JOKE TO THE REST OF THE WORLD??????????

I am EAGER for ANSWERS to these questions.

Please let me have your thoughts and opinions; enquiring minds need to know!!!!!!!!!!!!

Shame On You Starbucks.

The Enemy!

I am aware I am late in writing about this, but I decided I had post something just to state how shocked I am over it all.

I couldn’t believe that Starbucks hadn’t been paying corporation tax in the UK for the last 3 years!
Claiming they have actually been making loses?!

Why are they still trading then? If they are making loses then their business planning or projections must be far from correct? This alone annoys me! I had my own experience with trying to perfect these very things to please the powers that be, so I could prove I was able to begin my own business venture. I had to meet their business requirements 100% and no stone could be left unturned, including paying tax from day one of trading!

It seems it is OK for some companies to make a mess of their finances, just because they are global conglomerates with power, yet the small fish in the pond can’t put a step out of place if they want to even begin trading.

How is it fair to let these big companies slide off the radar, including for paying tax; yet, smaller new companies are constantly put through the mill?!

The UK , well I feel, hardly support small ventures enough, but that is another story.

So, tax evasion??? I am not a tax expert, but how can any company with such a huge portfolio, and presence be allowed to dodge contributing to the pot they make their profit from?? Oh, they made loses, of course! I really wish I could say I’m not paying my tax too as I have made loses. Yet, if I paid one pound less than I was supposed to there would be trouble. Not to mention, I don’t have the choice, tax returns and even tax deductions from salaries are scrutinised. Hell, I have been unlucky enough to pay too much tax; I have never paid too little, EVER, chance would be a fine thing!

Another aggrieved party.

It seems us small fish can’t get away with anything! Which poignantly highlights life for the average worker in the UK today!

The big fish can disagree with the rules and dictate that they don’t like something, because they are important as they hold the power and the wealth. Usually they get their own way as they are so revered by Government, or if not, they find a way around the problem; like disappearing to another country on-board their private yachts. Great!

The ordinary workers though just have to put up and shut up. They are too busy concentrating on keeping their little juggling balls in the air for fear of dropping them, and crashing down into oblivion. Yet, without ordinary workers there wouldn’t be any contributions into society, so why aren’t they revered and ‘cut more slack’?

It seems the ordinary workers are the ones resented and bombarded with the most demands upon them, and their money! I wish all the workers would one day decided to also ‘do a runner’ and let us see then what the UK Government would be left with, NOTHING!

As not even the giants in the UK economy; the powerful and wealthy, give a damn enough to pay their dues. So, why then should the ordinary workers have too?! Double standards; it is never what you know, but WHO you know that helps you swim not sink in the UK (regardless of what messes you make or how bad your finances are).

So, I too have decided to Boycott Starbucks. They should be ashamed depriving the UK of much needed tax money. Especially when the very people who prop up their business, their customers, are paying through the nose for everything! Including tax on the coffee they drink at Stabucks establishments! SHAME ON YOU Starbucks!

Take a look at the BBC Report:
The Starbucks Scandal

What The Wealthy Want

Recession? You Need Free Market Principles.

The many strands of recession

This post comes as a direct response to a ‘conversation’ I had with another person regarding recession, current economic climate and political solutions to Government debt and failings.

My intention is not to appear biased in favour of UK political preferences or experiences. I just want to raise the topics that were initially put to me, and answer with my thought on them. So, here is the basis of the initial conversation:

‘Free Market Principles (*description located at the bottom of the post) will save the US from falling into the same problems as Europe and the UK now face’.

I have been wondering just how many of these principles, and in what measure, are actually already adopted in countries all over the globe? Could it be that countries already going through recession ignored these principles and therefore floundered? Could these principles alone be the answer to and solution for future recessions? Are a set of inflexible principles capable of such a feat? Are reasons for recession so ‘cut and dry’?

Well, the person who argued the merits of Free Market Principles used certain failings as a measuring tool to highlight what had brought about recession; unemployment, Government debt, taxing the rich, ‘big Government’ as opposed to limited Government, and the over reliance on grand scale public welfare or social welfare policies classed as the ‘Nanny State’.

Now there are issues which can be debated.

Those of you, who may read my blog, you might be already familiar with my take on the UK Government and welfare system – NHS and state benefits. See below for further links:
Poverty In The UK
The UK Welfare State
The Declining Health Of The NHS

These systems are not perfect, and I will be the first to admit that, but like anything there is more to the issues than may initially appear. That is why no issues which any country or Government face at the moment can be so easily deemed a failure or because of recession. The background information for that failure should be first discussed first.

Let me also add, no country is perfect and neither are ANY Governments. There are many mistakes made, and many issues then created as a result of bad policies or decisions.

On to my thoughts:

I am not going to break down exactly how Free Market Principles apply or should apply. As I mentioned earlier I want to see behind the reasons for failures, to talk about the ‘tools’ used as a measure of failure.

Government Debt:

Initially I question the sweeping generalisation of Government debt as a simple cause for recession. Some nations like the UK for example have had to have debt to survive 2 world wars. Without debt the country would never have scraped through such detrimental hardships brought about by the wars.

Factors that lead to any Government debt are a ‘chicken and an egg’ scenario; many issues, like those the UK faced in the war eras have been running on since that time without being fixed. Deep flaws in policies and decisions have occurred as Government has grown and changed its form over the years. The welfare State for example has its very origins in the aftermath of the 2nd World War, and since then it has out grown its initial remit, but this change has never been fully represented in the entity it has now become (I will discuss this later). Hence, issues linking to failure.

In most countries there will be hidden issues, plastered over cracks that once recession hits them, they become highlighted and exasperated; these cracks then become huge holes, for example issues with unemployment. These issues may have been left lingering until a recession hits; when a country or Government is under the most scrutiny, then the issues have to be seen to be dealt with, then they gain attention.

Factors for unemployment do include going through a recession:

Yes, but other factors can lead to the final breaking point. Rapid changes in technology, disability, changes in business, changes in supply and demand, attitude towards employers, willingness to work, immigration, climate change, migration, perception of employees, employee values, discriminating factors in the place of work (may include discrimination on the basis of age, class, ethnicity, colour and race) and ability to look for employment all effect the figures initially before any recession begins.

Taxation is never a favourable topic:

Raising taxes is not especially popular either, and when the wealthy of the country are going to be effected, then that is seen as damn right outrageous. I will bring in France here: French Prime Minister has said there will be a 75% tax rate for people earning more than 1m Euros.

Now I don’t necessarily agree with the tax level France is opting for, but people should be taxed according to what they earn. Wealthier people shouldn’t have a free pass just because they bring ‘wealth’ into the country, because so does everyone who works and contributes to the economy of the country. It is merely that the wealthy have more money to be taxed or contribute to a country with, but they are part of the country too. The ordinary working person is affected more by fluctuations in tax during recession; on their salary and goods, and it is them who are generally Struggling To Make Ends Meet

Perhaps France opted for this tax increase for the wealthy as they didn’t wish to impose harsh cuts on public services that would affect the whole country. Look at the UK and the ‘Geddes Axe’; recommended slashing government spending in precisely the way today’s believers in ‘expansionary austerity’ recommend in time of rescission. Did it work for the UK in the 1920’s, no and consequently this spiralled UK’s debt levels. Pre First World War debt levels weren’t attained again until 1990. So cutting Government public spending isn’t always the answer.

Public services are a drain in times of recession though:

Well they have been a drain for years and why, well there are complex reasons. Let me concentrate on the UK’s NHS. This system has evolved over the years; peoples changing lifestyles, higher populations, larger catchment areas, more diagnoses of illnesses before unrecognised, Doctors running National Health and Private surgeries which clash, not enough medical staff, privatisation of the 1980’s, rising wages, Primary Care Trusts and the amount of ‘pen pushing’ bureaucrats hampering Government money being spent where it needs to be. In the UK ‘big Government’ as opposed to the limited version is not to blame for the failings, but rather that Government hasn’t enough of a hold and control over proceedings. They haven’t a clue what is going, and therefore the whole system has become lax, un-scrutinized and out of control. It is a lack of grasping the changes and implementing a policy that reflects this that causes the trouble, not recession.

The NHS is not perfect, but again neither is for example the US system, and the US isn’t in a recession like the UK. People in the US can’t afford insurance (30 million of them to be precise). So, how can limited Government eradicate any of these issues for any country?

OK let’s talk about who likes Free Market Principles.

Well, the conservatives who claim to have a profound love of them have no use for them; professing fealty to the markets is only a rhetorical strategy. Some would say they favour policies that distort the market in such a way that income and wealth flows to those at the top, but given that most people who cast votes in elections are not among that rarefied few, they have no desire to defend those policies on their merits. So, do they have a place in a society where the majority struggle to live??

But big Government ruins the countries wealth:

I feel a Government needs to know what is going on in their country, not be blind to it (I argue they are blind enough). It is a Governments duty to ensure its citizens when in need, receive help in the form of public services. They are there to respond to needs or why else do we elect them? What is the need for Government per se if they have no role in the country they govern?

I think everyone should be ensured they have a slice of the cake in the 21st century, even if it is a small slice, better than starving to death under the premise of ‘we can’t intervene we are a limited Government’.

People should not be allowed to flounder and disappear just like dust under a carpet; just because they aren’t a member of the ‘select committee’ (the wealthy) in society.

Boom and bust is worse under principles advocating intervention:

Well maybe, but then under a limited Government where there is no intervention is anything truly invested in; anything other than protecting and encouraging wealth? Pursuit of wealth above public needs can be detrimental to a flourishing society, as it reflects and encourages only a certain percentage of people and people’s lives. Not everyone can be wealthy, not everyone’s lives run smoothly.
I for one don’t want a return to a Dickensian way of life, I think I prefer intervention.

*Free Market Principles:
Individual Rights, Limited Government, Equal Justice Under Law, Spontaneous Order, Private Ownership, Subsidiary and the Golden Rule of honesty. Yet I am not going to focus on whether or not these principles, word for word, do impact and can solve recession. Instead I am going to think about reasons

Another Day Another Strike

‘Se Vende’ or For Sale – pertinent sign to denote how staff feel about proposals

Regional Government in Madrid performed an unexpected back track on their plans to reform the structure and function of La Princesa hospital in the capital.

On October 31, regional Popular Party (PP) premier Ignacio González announced that the pioneering research hospital, which has stood for more than 150 years, would be turned into a specialist centre for the treatment of over 75’s only.

This was a shock, considering La Princesa is my local hospital. Also upon visiting there I couldn’t quite believe how busy the place was; it is not as though the services it provides the community aren’t sorely needed. Without treating adults of all ages, where else would the patients go? Surely another hospital couldn’t cope with stresses and strains of extra people to attend to, not to mention to services that would be lost to the community if La Princesa was made ‘redundant’ of its current functions.

The reason for La Princesa’s importance in my local area is that it offers the community 40 specialist treatments, which include; brain surgery, facial reconstruction surgery, and thoracic and cardiac treatments. Also, the population it serves exceeds a quarter of a million (just within its catchment area).

La Princesa is an important piece of the public service jigsaw. A large ‘player’ to try and maim without backlash.

This Government has proposed health cuts previously, and they didn’t go down well with the populace either; so what were they thinking? Well, they they haven’t been obviously as it seems a panicked move to quickly ‘save money’. A false economy in the long run though, with more people unemployed, less health care, more illness and strained services; kind of like cutting of your nose to spite your face.

If the Government had listened at all to the messages of the previous strikes and protests, they would have realised and taken seriously how their electorate felt about such cuts. Yet, they haven’t. So, on the 16th November I was out and about in the evening, and managed to witness another massive protest carried out by the staff and patients of La Princesa. It was moving to watch.

The people were obviously frightened that the hospital would close; losing the services it provides and lose staff. Health care is a vital public services, and public services in any recession are essential for the life blood of the country and the Government. To meddle without good cause will create havoc in the community, and soon make any political party unfavourable. It seems ridiculous to merely chop away in such a careless fashion at a service much required.

Crying for La Princesa

There has even been a petition gained of over 200,000 signatures, one signatory was Madrid’s Mayor Ana Botella. Showing how far the discontent reaches with Government proposals.

From the retaliation of the community, and the hospital staff, PP representatives of the Madrid region’s health department met with The Hospital Workers’ Committee. Funnily enough after this there was a backtrack on the original scheme to curtail La Princesa’s range of services. A concord was reached that the hospital will retain its current status, and continue to treat adults of all ages, and the teaching and investigation it performs too.

Labour unions however remain sceptical and continue to accuse the regional government of acquiescing to private businesses. Allowing private companies free rein to manage the hospitals, although the buildings are being constructed with public money.

These fears have credence as premier Ignacio González proposals already highlight; administration of six recently built hospitals will be soon tendered out to the private sector. More saving money, yes, that and more cuts to the budget. Planned healthcare spending in the region for next year has been cut by seven percent (which is roughly 45% of the budget for health for next year). So this is indeed another attempt to save money, and repay Spanish debt; but at a cost to health and well-being.

Though there has been a Government opinion ‘turn around’ on La Princesa, protests will continue. The people want this ‘turn around’ to be presented formally and documented in writing.

Does that denote a severe lack of distrust for this ‘Popular Party’ Government (ironic name)? Yes, I think so. I suppose their track record already supersedes their words.

If you like my post, just SHARE it 🙂

Copy Right Notice:
© Bex Houghagen and The Savvy Senorita, 2012. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Bex Houghagen and The Savvy Senorita with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Poverty In The UK

Child poverty on the increase in the UK

‘Family breakdown, drug addiction, debt and education results are among the factors that could be used to measure child poverty in future, UK Government ministers say’ BBC News.

This reality check comes after the findings of The Institute for Fiscal Studies released their two year projection for how child poverty in the UK will rise by 400,000.

Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith responded by saying that the current income-based method of measuring poverty is too simple, therefore new indicators have to be agreed upon to measure this thoroughly.

Wow, is all I can say; and it took a UK Government how long exactly to realise that the measures relied upon to indicate poverty were failing? Where have they been hiding all these decades? Oh, of course, behind the curtain of their lives of privilege. Doesn’t this highlight just how out of touch these ‘leaders’ are with their own electorate?

Salary alone means nothing to poverty indicators; nothing is so ‘cut and dry’. I have mentioned this before; Poverty In The 21st Century

People can be working full time, and still drop below the poverty line because of; general household bills, unemployment, benefit reliance, family breakdown, increase in food prices, increase in travel prices and fuel, debt, house repayments, childcare, how large the family is, so on and so on.

At the moment a child in the UK is considered to be living in poverty if the household income is £251 per week or less. This then equates to 2.3 million children living in poverty. Now considering that as a fact which stands alone, too many children are in poverty; but now add that to the other indicators above, which are currently not being included in the poverty measures. Now I’d say that 2.3 million is looking severely under estimated as a figure; so low in fact I doubt any Government would like to consider the reality of the poverty that blights the UK!

All in all it is a nice figure to dwell upon, considering the UK is supposed to be a ‘developed’ country, wealthy and upwardly mobile! Seems to me that propaganda has never been so alive and well in Politics. It is just a question of whose faith Government ministers are trying to maintain; their electorates or their own?

Children in Poverty

Many decisions have been criticised as increasing child poverty, but one factor has been blamed as highly significant; freezing child benefit. The Labour Party have now warned that by 2020 the UK would return to “sky-high levels of child poverty” unless the Government made changes to this and other areas. Yet, with or without child benefit people would be poor. Child benefit is hardly enough to compensate for dire wages, high levels of debt, rising living costs and all the other things that make a person/family poor!!!!! Benefits are not the answer to the root of the problems.

So, I wonder what has finally brought the issue of poverty to the table of plenty. Well, the Labour Party’s ‘picking’ at the current Conservative/Liberal Democrat Government no doubt has provided some encouragement. Shadow Employment minister Stephen Timms has been also blowing the trumpet of his own Labour Party Government; reminding the electorate of what a mistake they made in not re-electing them, laugh out loud!

Mr Timms has said that there had been a; “Big reduction of over a million in the number of children below the poverty line” when Labour held Government, and since the new Government gained power; “that number is now going up”.

Yet, what has any Government really done to improve the people’s lives? What one policy really has impacted on decreasing poverty in all its formats; from homelessness to child poverty? Answer, nothing substantial. They are good at bickering amongst themselves, blaming one another and scoring points; but facing the facts and dealing with then once in power, well, that is another story altogether! It doesn’t matter what Government is in power, things don’t significantly change for the people.
The major changes which are now creating significant impacts in policies, and reflecting poorly upon the UK Government is the economic crisis and austerity measures. Who knew this could be a positive thing?! This ‘series of unfortunate events’ has been a real kick in their rear; yet, people are still suffering, and not even the economic crisis has motivated the Government enough, well, yet anyway.
What will it take to make the Government change things??? How dire must it become for people, their people??

OK, so the Government has plans to carry out a consultation to consider what other factors need to be included to measure poverty. Yet, this is merely more time and money wasted, while people still live in poverty!

Even ‘The Child Poverty Action Group’ have raised concerns over this consultation, and proposed additions to the current salary measurement. They have questioned whether further indicators to mark poverty would only make defining it too broad and non specific (we all know the Government don’t deal with complicated very well). This too broad and non specific could only grant a free pass to any Government; they would then not be held accountable for any failings which could occur in this area. It would then be merely life in general to blame, not Government polices and taxation. A Government can’t interfere with life, the ‘free market’, capitalism or whatever else they can use as an excuse.

Anyway, while the Government bicker and decide to decide, poverty continues as it always has. A grim reminder that life isn’t all peaches and cream.

If you like my post please share it 🙂

Copy Right Notice:
© Bex Houghagen and The Savvy Senorita, 2012. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Bex Houghagen and The Savvy Senorita with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.