Westministenders: Theresa's Common People

[RedToothBrush]

She came from Oxfordshire she had a thirst for knowledge
She studied geography at Saint Hugh's College
That's where politics
Caught her eye

She told them that her husband was loaded
The press barons said "In that case have a rum and coca-cola"
She said "Fine"
And in thirty seconds time she said

I want to look like common people
I want to do whatever common people do
I want to eat like common people
I want to sleep like common people
Like you

Well what else could Fiona and Nick do
They said "We'll see what we can do"

They took her to a supermarket
I don't know why
But they had to start it somewhere
So it started there
They said pretend you've got no money
She just laughed and said
"Oh you're so funny"
They smiled "Yeah”
Well we can't see anyone else smiling in here

Are you sure you want to live like common people
You want to see whatever common people see
You want to eat like common people
You want to sleep like common people
Like me

But she didn't understand
She just smiled and held Trump’s hand

Order that benefits get the chop
Tell them all to get a job
Promise to bring back the grammar school
Pretend you don’t think them a fool
But still you'll never get it right
'Cause when you're laid in bed at night
Watching the news talking about building the wall
All have to do is call your mates to fake it all

You'll never live like common people
You'll never do whatever common people do
You'll never fail like common people
You'll never watch your life slide out of view
Whilst you blame it all on the EU
Because that’s all you can do

Sing along with the common people
Sing along and it might just get Brexit through
Laugh along with the common people
Laugh about leaving the EU

It’s the most stupid thing that you will do
Because you think that it is cool
You’ll call them a ‘lying foreigner’
But don’t say we didn’t warn you
You’ll regret saying we are better off out
'Cause everybody hates a benefits tourist

It doesn’t matter if you can’t do the math
With all those pockets that you grease
You’ll win the vote in Bath

You will never understand
How it feels to live your life
With no meaning or control
And with nowhere left to go
You are amazed that they exist
And wish they were all white
So you tell ‘The Big Lie’

Get THE flat above THE shop
Cut your hair and get THE job
Trick some mugs and hire some fool
Pretend you are not really cruel
But still you'll never get it right
Instead you're plotting late at night
About which ‘cockroach’ will take the fall
All have to do is call your mates to fake it all
Yeah

You'll never live like common people
You'll never do what common people do
You'll never fail like common people
You'll never watch your life slide out of view
As we plan to leave the EU
Because there's nothing else left to do

But ‘moan’ about how we don’t want to leave the EU.

Place marking unashamedly. Stonking first thread post.

But you can bet that most large firms are already working on their contingency plans.

This article about American Politics is rather revealing:

apnews.com/780cc65e99354b00877c870acf2cdaf0
Trump loyalists pay little heed to revelations rocking DC

“I tuned it out,” said 44-year-old Michele Velardi, a mother of three sons, during a break from her job at a Staten Island hair salon. “I didn’t want to be depressed. I don’t want to feel that he’s not doing what he said, so I just choose to not listen.”

and

“Trump’s not in it for the money. He’s got plenty of money,” the younger Foy said. Clinton, he added, “was in it for herself.”

and

He wants to see Trump follow through on his conservative policy promises.

“If he doesn’t govern like a conservative and looks more like a Democrat, then I’ll have to re-evaluate,” Strathman said.

and

Could anything persuade him to abandon Trump?

“If he gases his own people, yeah I would be against him,” Ottrando said, saying afterward that he was only joking.

Do we think there are Brexit supporters of the same mindset?

LH
Conservatives - conserving what you've got, sod everyone else.

Fantastic opening post, Red (although you could have saved yourself some time by just c&p'ing Jarvis Cocker's seminal follow up song Cunts Are Still Running the World).

Cailleach - I agree with your analysis on why Brexit hasn't been costed .

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/tory-dementia-tax-backfire-theresa-may/
The Tory ‘dementia tax’ could backfire for Theresa May

Let’s imagine two 80-year-old widows who live next-door to each other somewhere in the south of England. Their properties are both worth £312,000 and they have another £10,000 in other assets, so a total of £322,000 each. Happily, they both live till 95. Unhappily, one of them suffers dementia for 10 years, and soonneeds round-the-clock care. The other widow is healthy and reasonably active until the very end of her life.

Under the new Conservative plans, the one who is healthy until the end of her life will leave her estate completely intact to her loved ones. The one who needs all that care, however, will be billed up to £222,000.

and

So is the May proposal remotely fair? It doesn’t seem so to me. This is effectively a massive inheritance tax – but only on those who are ill in old age and need to be looked after. People are calling it a ‘dementia tax’ on Twitter, which I suspect will catch on.

and

Whatever happened to the Conservative belief that inheritance was a good thing? To the idea that building up assets with your children or grandchildren’s futures in mind was one of the very noblest, not to mention the most human and natural, aims in life?

and

The Dilnot proposals to cap an individual’s care costs have been replaced by something worse. Wouldn’t it have been possible – and fairer and better – to engineer pooled risk among the general population, providing a kind of social care insurance? We’re all going to get old one day.

Remember this is the Spectator.

Could this be the first Manifesto pledge that ends up getting binned?

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/baby-boomers-millennials-more-entitled-older-generation-savings-homeowner-income-study-house-car-a7742411.html
Baby boomers more entitled than millennials, says study
It's not entitlement, it's growing up in a challenging economic climate

Another Tory Manifesto Gem here:
Mayoral and police and crime commissioner elections which are currently Single Transferable Vote are going to be changed to FPTP.

Great OP, red

I do think it is right though that whither you stay in your own home or go into care should not matter with regard how much you have to pay The point is that the level at which you have to pay up to is £23500 at the moment where as the Tories are suggesting you it go up to £100,000 and that you won't have to pay until you die. At the moment you have to sell up your family home when you go into a home.

publiclawforeveryone.com/2017/05/18/the-conservative-partys-2017-manifesto-and-the-constitution/
The Conservative Party Manifesto and theConstitution
by Prof Mark Elliott

Key Paras from article:

All of the major UK-wide political parties have now published their manifestos for the 2017 general election. All, inevitably, contain significant proposals regarding the constitution. The Liberal Democrats, for instance, have underlined their strong commitments to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and to reform of the voting system, and propose a shift to a “federal UK”. The Labour Party has proposed “a Constitutional Convention to examine and advise on reforming of the way Britain works at a fundamental level”; this would include consideration of “the option of a more federalised country”. Labour, like the Lib Dems, would also replace the House of Lords with an elected second chamber, and would retain the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA).

Most of the article is about the Tory Manifesto since its what we will end up with.

The manifesto observes — correctly — that “the United Kingdom Government has in the past tended to ‘devolve and forget’”, and pledges that a new Conservative Government would “put that right”.
but
However, the manifesto has very little to say about how a new Conservative Government would actually attend to the health of the Union

As far as England is concerned, there is no mention — either positive or negative — of the “English votes for English laws” system introduced in the wake of the Scottish independence referendum, but there is some discussion of English “devolution”.

The manifesto implicitly draws attention to a tension — also evident in that White Paper — between the imperatives of Brexit and the management of the territorial constitution. The manifesto pledges to “respect the devolution settlements”, promising that “no decision-making that has been devolved will be taken back to Westminster”. It also says that devolved authority is likely to be enhanced by Brexit, with some powers that are repatriated from the EU being directed to the devolved capitals rather than being hoarded by Westminster and Whitehall.

But the manifesto also enters a note of caution, arguing that there is a need to ensure that “as we leave the EU no new barriers to living and doing business within our own union are created”.

the policy of HRA repeal has been dropped. Nor is there, according to the manifesto, any prospect — at least for the time being — of withdrawal from the ECHR.

But the commitments to the HRA and the ECHR contained within the Conservatives’ manifesto are explicitly and notably contingent. Thus a Conservative Government “will not repeal or replace the Human Rights Act while the process of Brexit is underway”. To similar effect, the UK “will remain [a] signator[y] to the European Convention on Human Rights for the duration of the next parliament”.

Note deliberate wording.

The manifesto contends that “collective faith in our democratic institutions and our justice system has declined in the past two decades” and argues that “in responding to the historic vote on our membership of the European Union”, a new Conservative Government will “re-establish faith in our democracy”.

!!!!!! Good luck with doing that !!!!!
Especially when you are pressing ahead with the boundary changes reducing the HoC to 600.

The manifesto goes on to say that “comprehensive reform” of the House of Lords “is not a priority”. This language is perhaps surprisingly equivocal, in that it does not rule out “comprehensive reform”. The subtext, however, is tolerably clear. In a fit of constitutional pique following a defeat in the House of Lords on secondary legislation concerning tax credits, the Government commissioned Lord Strathclyde to review the House of Lords’ role in relation to such legislation. The Strathclyde Review concluded that the House of Lords’ powers in respect of statutory instruments should be brought more into line with its powers, under the Parliament Acts 1911–49, in respect of primary legislation. The Lords would have lost its power to block statutory instruments, any attempt to block being vulnerable to the exercise by the House of Commons of an override power. As with primary legislation, the Lords would have been able to require the Commons to think again, but it would not have wielded a veto.

These proposals were widely condemned, and the Government subsequently said that it would not implement the Review. But it clearly indicated that the clipping of the Lords’ wings was not entirely off the table, and that the proposals would be looked at again if the House of Lords (in the Government’s view) constitutionally overreached.

I actually agree with the care costs policy.

Just over 3 times more is to be ring-fenced than at present - that is a good thing surely?

And if you have assets, then I don't see a problem with contributing towards the care you receive - the old lady in the example is still able to leave £100 000 to her offspring - no small amount.

And healthy old lady could blow hers on a cruise & leave her kids nothing at all...

Wrt Serious Fraud Office and National Crime Agency merger -
Same budget for twice the agency as one or the other currently enjoys?
Will the merged departments end up fighting over meager resources and priorities, while fraudsters, money launderers and criminals frolic away undisturbed?
Do they anticipate halving the admin personnel?

The proposal to move chunks of the civil service out of London is a message to Sadiq Khan that the government giveth and the government taketh away, so best not to get too big for his boots.

(posted this on previous thread)

WTAF, how can the Leaders debate not include the Conservative party or Labour Party?

It's a fucking joke.

We are being brainwashed here.

The times tables is not at all a random item in the manifesto.

It is pure dog whistlery. People of a certain age will lap this up.

People of a certain age will lap this up.
Only certain people, I would have thought. Not the "I'm no good at maths" brigade.

Wrt ID requirement for voting - in the US, states issue a state ID to people as an alternative to a DL. You have to pay a fee, provide proof of residence and identity, and go to a Secretary of State's office (there are multiple branches in each state) to get one. It is a photo ID. People get it because you need a photo ID for lots of purposes in the US.

I suspect that TM envisions a universal ID independent of passport or DL and that this is going to be slipped past the electorate linked to voting. Some people will be missed that way, because there are people who won't want to vote at all, ever.

But then I suspect the Tories will require some sort of ID eventually for welfare receipt, or for NHS use, or for sending your child to school, or for applying for social housing, etc. Ultimately everyone will have one, and non-possession will be used against immigrants.

Not even the I'm no good at maths brigade if they are of a certain age will be able to resist the dog whistle.

The times tables thing is part of the harkening back to the good old days element of the Tory and Brexit picture of Britain - when every child behaved him or herself impeccably or got a clip on the ear or a caning from the teacher, there were no hoodies, no graffiti, no rude teens (no teens at all really) or small children being themselves in cafes, and people had a Proper Respect for The Rules.

It appeals to people who can't understand that logic, languages and programming is what should be taught in schools as components of mathematics.

It is the closest thing to bringing back corporal punishment in schools that they can get away with.

Loving your song, Red!

At the moment you have to sell up your family home when you go into a home

Not true Corcory, not now or even before 2014 when the first chunk of the Care Act came in. It's just that under the pre Care Act system you could ask to enter into a deferred payment agreement with your council, but they could decline to help you (I don't know if there are any stats on how often this happened): after the Care Act (which partially implemented the Dilnot recommendations) you have the right to enter into a DPA. Hands up who is surprised that along with this new entitlement came a much higher interest charge? (Under the old system your debt to the council was interest free for up to 8 weeks from your death, but councils are now able to charge interest from the start of your DPA).

No one was forced to sell their home under the old system (there was no easy legal framework to allow this, although I suppose it might have been possible in exceptional cases). However, the reality is that most people in residential care don't return home again, and many people find it more convenient to sell the house (which is usually empty and often in dated decorative order) rather than becoming amateur landlords or letting it moulder. When you consider that renting out a house might entail spending money to bring the property up to standard (where does that come from?), that annual gas checks etc will be needed and any rental income will be taxed it's not surprising that more people just try to sell up. (Not to mention that it's often the homeowner's adult children who are usually sorting out the arrangements, frequently following a crisis).

That's the reality, but of course the idea of having one's house taken away is very emotive, so it's cunning of the politicians to appear to promise something that seems reassuring on its face, but which actually plucks the goose more closely than the previous system with less hissing...

It will be interesting to see how the details are worked out: currently the value of your home is disregarded for residential care means testing if it's occupied by your spouse or a dependent relative (under 16, over 60 or disabled). I would hope that this will be retained, but who knows? I would also expect the rules about valuing shares in properties to be tightened up, although it's likely to be in the Government's favour!

Faisal Islam‏*@faisalislam*
Number of English homes owned outright without mortgage, overtook those mortgaged in 2013 - this was a significant shift for politics etc...
... Politics of all this very interesting - for a long time at least 1980 to 1997 the proportion of outright owned homes was at 25%...
... since 1997 the proportion of homes owned outright without mortgage has shot up from 26% to 34%... mortgaged homes fallen from 43% to 29%
... two factors: 1. demographics, people paying off mortgages from 80s boom as they retire 2. Low & stable interest rates enabling payoff
...imagine this chart in economics and in votes (English Housing Survey) 5 million over 65/ retired households. 4.8 million have no mortgage
... or from same table 6.4 million over 55s out of 7.7 million households own their homes outright, no mortgage. Avg English house = £234k

Robert Peston‏*@Peston*

OK. I will start with trivia. Why is @timfarron wearing same suit and tie as yesterday? #ITVDebate

I actually believe he's been wearing it all week!

LH, definition of Conservatism:
Conservatism (n). A system of government perpetuated by the premise of ensuring voters can always feel better than the worst off.

I would substitute:
"Conservatism (n). A system of government perpetuated by the premise of ensuring voters can always feel morally superior to the worst off."

Peregrina In blue ink? somebody gave me a rogue black pen, thank goodness that there was not a pedant to throw my 100 envelopes in the bin I also found myself harbouring terrible reactionary thoughts about the tendency of couples to retain their individual identities....

I have similar reactionary and possible conspiracy theory thoughts about developers fitting their front doors with those awful brush things. If the point is to stop leaflets, they ain't met me.....

Just occurred to me that Conservative Central Office wasted their Freepost hit on the terribly targeted letter from Theresa whereas any intelligent caring party would send out a letter lovingly by somebody with aching knuckles and going boggle eyed with a pile of torn up envelopes with their own postcode on them personally addressed in blue ink and written by the candidate in full knowledge of the issues that really matter locally, the fuck up that is BREXIT, schools cuts, NHS cuts, social care cuts, and offering their electorate respect for their intelligence and also evidence that they have intelligence, empathy and care in spades. It does not matter that I have a background in direct marketing and know that little things, even blue ink, make a huge difference to how a message is received, or even read in the first place....

i.e. a shameless appeal to vanity and a means of making greed good.

Faisal Islam‏*@faisalislam*

...q for policy makers - make sense to subsidise care of people who own outright asset like that, while its passed tax free to their kids?..
...or if you need to fund costs of care for ageing society, who pays? Workers? Business? Older people who have done well? Kids inheritances?
Either way Conservatives have now come up with a way of accessing boomer generation's housing equity to pay for care (on individual basis)
... it's basically a form of wealth tax deferred until after death, in same way contingent-repayable tuition fees = graduate tax ...
But the baby boomer housing equity pot of gold is now in play for UK politics. suspect many will presume that it is not the state's to take

I don't disagree with this. BUT at the same time some families financially plan as a family and do think about inheritance. To add that level of uncertainty over whether you will get that or not based on a health lottery is wrong in terms of fairness and wrong in terms of enabling families to think about their future through generations. It also should encourage people to be responsible for their care - rather than incentive pissing it up the wall, leaving the young to foot the bill anyway. Not only this, what if there is a genetic condition within a family that requires care? You get the double hit of the illness and the loss of inheritance.

But you can bet that most large firms are already working on their contingency plans.

But only the foreign companies are talking about them.

Have been in London for meetings all week, much doom and gloom in my industry - but little of it expressed in public, for fear of retribution.

Do kids in UK schools not learn times tables? My DD was reluctant but now she is doing maths for her baccalaureat she has learnt all the squares and cubes up to 20 because it makes you faster ...

I think if I asked my 30 and 40 something colleagues 7x8 they would all be able to answer, but they are all phds with a numerate background (and we do a job where being able to do exchange rate and weight conversions in your head is a huge asset.)