ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
One Notion Labour - Cruddas suggested cutting benefits if parents did not vaccinate with MMR jab(52 Posts)
One Notion Labour - don't you just love them and don't they just love you?
Fortunately One Notion Labour have distanced themselves from this crackpot idea by one of their policy guru type One Notion 'thinkers'.
"Parents should lose their child benefit if they refuse to immunise their children with the MMR jab, a senior Labour MP has suggested.
Families will have to prove their child’s vaccination records are up to date to qualify for handouts, said Jon Cruddas, who is leading the party’s policy review.
The MP for Dagenham & Rainham suggested the measure, which is already in place in Australia, could be a way to link behaviour with state benefits and services.
However, Labour rushed to dissociate itself from the idea last night, saying ‘it is not part of the policy review’."
Apparently the one Notion socialists in Australia had a policy a bit similar to this. Fortunately the Australian public voted the One Notioners out.
These are the sort of people involved in senior policy thinking. Keep your wits about you and watch out for more crackpot policies dressed up as One Notion thinking!
"When he was still in power this summer, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced that people who did not immunise their children would be denied some benefits to boost vaccination rates for diseases such as whooping cough and measles.
Exemptions would only be made on religious or medical grounds, he said."
Some people may be wondering who Cruddas is.
Is he a crackpot? Well, put it this way, he is or was head of One Notion Labour's policy review.
Here is is opining on "One Nation statecraft" and about his values of reposnsibility, reciprocity and relationships. It is in a magazine called the "New Statesman", but Cruddas and Statesman and "One Nation Statecraft" is surely some type of One Notion joke.
Orwell would have had a field-day with these progressive pygmies and their concealment of crackpot policies beneath the phoney patriotism of 'One Nation' and their use of Orwellian type language.
'Reciprocity' - yeah right! I wonder what he will be reciprocating.
It's quite offensive to read tabloid-style political slur talk like yours posted onto a discussion site. It makes me feel patronised and harangued and I doubt it will do your cause much good. We can read this sort of stuff in plenty of gutter newspapers. The best way to open a discussion isn't to try and seal the thread up from the opening with a caricature dismissal of Labour.
Still, you clearly don't want discussion in any case. So why post into an interactive environment? Go blog it somewhere.
Of course I want discusion. That's why I posted it here.
I opened my copy of today's Daily Mail and am shocked by what I read about what Cruddas was thinking. That's why I posted it here. It prompted me to put my coffee down and inform others of what some of these progressives are thinking.
ButThereAgain "The best way to open a discussion isn't to try and seal the thread up from the opening with a caricature dismissal of Labour."
It makes a nice change, normally its the left wingers on here doing exactly that about the Conservatives with their often rambling diatribes.
Well, the idea has been put forward, but Balls was disavowing it on an interview this morning.
All political parties come up with stupid 'pne notion' ideas. This one from Labour is particuarly daft.
Cue long thread where vaccinators and anti-vaccnators lay into each other and ignore the political 'one notion' idea.
Credit to One Nation labour that they have immediately clarified that this policy is not on the cards.
However, I find it worrying that it is reported to have been suggested by Jon Cruddas, who was appointed in 2012 to be Labour Party Policy Coordinator.
If this is one of his bright ideas, I dread to think what else he has in store for the good people of this one nation.
There is a One Nation Labour Party Conference televised on BBC Parliament right now.
It's only just started, but judging by the looks on some of the delegates faces, it looks like they wish it was over already.
It will be interesting to listen to the policies of Jon Cruddas if and when he makes a speech to the One Nation Conference.
Nothing should surprise us, really, but still it does. While they are slagging each other off, who knows what crackpot policies might be given the green light, just to spite another cabinet minister? They should re-name themselves One Corruption Labour.
Thanks for drawing attention to this, Claig. Nothing on here about Damien McBride, though?
'One Corruption' is not enough. That is an understatement!
' Nothing on here about Damien McBride, though?'
Yes, you are right. On the Daily Politics, a journalist has just said that everybody - journalists, MPs, ex-MPs, advisers are all talking about McBride in bars at the One Nation Conference, and yet on this forum, no one is mentioning it. Thank God our Daily Mail is not shying away from it and is giving it full welly.
Can#t believe there isn't a thread. Does nobody care about politics?
If you dig out any more info on what "medical grounds" might be accepted as valid, could you please post it, Claig?
Either in the UK or Australia. Could be hard to adjudicate.
Here is the Australian Immunisation Exemption Form for medical reasons.
"One Nation" is of course a Victorian Tory slogan. Which does make me wonder about Labour's
totalitarian paternalistic intentions.
Thanks, meditrina, I really appreciate that link.
What did One Nation mean? Was it to do with the Empire?
Nothing to do with the Empire - it was the Tory response to perceived increase in social inequality in the late 1800s
"One-nationism is a form of British political conservatism that views society as organic and values paternalism and pragmatism. The phrase "One-nation Tory" originated with Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881), who served as the chief Conservative spokesman and became Conservative Prime Minister in February 1868. He devised it to appeal to working class men as a solution to worsening divisions in society. As a political philosophy, one-nation conservatism reflects the belief that societies exist and develop organically, and that members within them have obligations towards each other. There is particular emphasis on the paternalistic obligation of the upper classes to those classes below them.
"The ideology featured heavily during Disraeli's terms in government, during which considerable social reforms were passed. Towards the end of the nineteenth century, the party moved away from paternalism in favour of free market capitalism, but fears of extremism during the interwar period caused the revival of one-nation conservatism. The philosophy continued to be held by the party throughout the post-war consensus until the rise of the New Right, which attributed the country's social and economic troubles to one-nation conservatism. David Cameron named Disraeli as his favourite Conservative and some commentators and MPs have suggested that Cameron's ideology contains an element of one-nationism. In his 2012 Conference Speech, Ed Miliband, leader of the Labour Party, sought to claim the phrase and apply it to Labour."
Dazzlell One Nation Toryism was the idea that the Tory party governed by broadly supported consent (of those who could vote) from all the constituents of the UK and as such, it's aims and objectives were pan-British in outlook. I assume Labour have adopted it as a ruse to display how the modern Tories are only really the party of England, being barely represented in Scotland and Wales and with Northern Ireland's politics being little more than a sectarian head count. If there is any grander philosophy behind it than that, I'd be surprised.
To address the original point raised by Claig, Cruddas is a dirty little big-state authoritarian fascist, as are far too many on the red benches. Why do you seem to expect more from these scum?
For crying out loud, claig. It's party conference season. Do you really expect politicians to speak sense this time of year? Last week it was UKIP's swivel-eyed loons and the Lib Dems' yellow-bellied power hungry weaklings, this week it's the turn of the Labour rabid wingnuts, next week no doubt some Tory extremists will come up with something supremely stupid and unworkable.
Will you be posting about that when it happens?
It's an utterly stupid idea. But no more stupid than reintroducing National Service for 18-26-year-olds as suggested by Conservative Philip Hollobone. They're politicians - take everything they say with a lpound bag of salt and you'll be fine.
'It's an utterly stupid idea'
I agree it is a stupid idea. But Jon Cruddas is not just a Philip Hollobone, whom I've never heard of. Jon Cruddas is or was in charge of Labour's Policy Review. He is the big cheese. He's the 'thinker' in One Notion Labour.
Labour appear to have stamped on the idea. But I think it may reflect some of the 'thinkers' true wishes. Don't forget that this was the party that wanted biometric ID cards and DNA databases and which began the workfare programme. Authoritarianism behind a progressive pose is not alien to their 'thinkers'.
We didn't all believe that Iraq had WMDs, we didn't all believe in the dire warnings about swine flu, we didn't all believe in an end to boom and bust and we don't all believe in the safety of vaccines. But do the 'thinkers' care what the people think?
Is it One Way or the Highway in their One Nation and will people be allowed free choice?
And if you look at the policy, you see again that it is aimed at forcing the poor who rely on benefits to make a choice between the jab and the benefits that they are entitled to and have paid tax for.
The One Nation Labour solicitors, barristers and human rights lawyers, the progressives and the metropolitan elite can afford to decline the vaccone, but those on benefits won't have the same luxury of choice. It's the same with the One Nation education policies, where the One Nation human rights lawyers can afford to send their children to private schools while those on benefits have little choice.
Well, we don't all believe that austerity is working, we don't all believe that cutting corporation tax is a good idea, we don't all believe that the 'spare room subsidy' as the Tories like to call it is going to save money and we don't all think selling off Royal Mail is a good idea. Do the Tories care what we think? Do the Lib Dems or UKIP or the Greens?
FWIW I oppose linking vaccination to child benefit. It's several steps too far. However, I would cautiously consider the idea of not allowing unvaccinated children into state schools. After all, the parents have the choice to home educate - the consequence of choosing not to vaccinate. And private schools could continue to set their own terms. There would have to be medical exemptions, and I would hope that there would also be funding for research into helping identify children who have medical contra-indications for vaccination. But there should be NO religious exemptions to vaccination. Recent measles epidemics in Wales and the Netherlands lead me to think that freedom has to be balanced by taking responsibility - not just for yourself and your family, but for the society you are a part of.
There are never any easy answers, and there is never one political party which is always right, or wrong. Your uncritical adoration of everything Tory and vilification of everything Labour sometime taints the things you post, which is a shame - you are clearly a deep thinker and a compassionate human being. Tribalism is ugly no matter where it manifests itself.
I'm going to bed now, but will be back tomorrow.
'Well, we don't all believe that austerity is working, we don't all believe that cutting corporation tax is a good idea, we don't all believe that the 'spare room subsidy' as the Tories like to call it is going to save money and we don't all think selling off Royal Mail is a good idea. Do the Tories care what we think? Do the Lib Dems or UKIP or the Greens?'
I don't believe in any of those things either. But injections and jabs pose a greater risk to health in the eyes of many people and they don't appreciate Big Pharma and Big Brother joining hands to try and force people on benefits to do as they say.
Join the discussion
Please login first.