Westminstenders: Silly Season

[RedToothBrush]

It's that time of year again when politicians seem to completely lose their marbles in order to impress the faithful. And it is beginning to feel like conference season is increasingly an exercise in religious ferver to the party rather than considering what's in the best interests of the whole country.

Labour have got off to a good start before their conference opens, by almost starting complete melt down.

The Tories have promised to break from convention and try and over shadow the others, so that's something to look forward to.

And early this week we have the supreme Court ruling which could, regardless of which direction it swings, have massive ramifications for our democracy.

Big week ahead.

"Big Choc Frenzy that they are somehow engaged on a project to deprive people of independence."

Rubbish - I never posted that and I don't believe it
On the contrary, SS want to keep people in their own homes as long as possible because it's cheaper

What I said is that the elderly want to keep their independence and stay in their homes,
not that there is a conspiracy to stop them

and that it is in the interests of the state to subsidise them to do so, as happens in Scotland

Once they have to go into care homes though, then imo those with substantial assets should pay - because that is why one has assets

Contrary to what I keep reading on MN, it isn't pointless to save for old age:
money gives choices^

When the time came, I paid for my mum to go into a private home which was quite a bit more expensive than what SS would have paid, but it was so much better:
lovely rooms & grounds, daily enrichment activities, well-qualified staff who'd mostly been there 15-20 years
No comparison to the homes within the SS budget

Both main parties have had royal commissions to look into social care (dilnot report etc) and have not adopted the recommendations because they're made politically toxic. Either Labour's death tax or the tories' dementia tax would have been an improvement, but the opposition made so much political capital out of them that neither could be implemented.

We already have a system that leaves only 23k or so of assets

Since that seems the 3rd rail in British politics, it'll probably stay like this until at least the 2 main parties agree on something else
Currently they seem unable to agree on anything

I agree IHT is far too low a % - we should have a sliding scale,
with exceptions for small family businesses like farms etc

Inheritance is exacerbating the growing wealth divide
Within a generation, it becomes a chasm between those whose parents leave them a property and those who inherit nothin

@BirdandSparrow

I’m sorry that must be very worrying. I wish I could say that I’m sure it will be ok and that Boris will sign such a reciprocal agreement. But I fear that he and his cronies actually WANT the consequences of not signing, as they get to complain about “ discrimination “ from Spain.

The same thing happened with university fees between Scotland and rUK. Westminster refused to sign a reciprocal agreement so now the simple minded English voter can complain that the Scots discriminate against them by charging while the French / Germans / Latvians get it for free. While failing to understand that Scottish students pay fees at English universities because that’s what reciprocity means.

Sigh.

We have to tax something and I'd much rather tax wealth than income

Once they have to go into care homes though, then imo those with substantial assets should pay - because that is why one has assets

But if you use that argument then you could say that those needing cancer treatment should sell their houses to pay for it (and yes I know that some do, if their treatment is experimental or new and not available on the NHS/rejected by NICE). If you have dementia that is an illness. Parkinson's is an illness. If you are simply frail the chances are you can stay in your home with help. Or live in a care home, which is still expensive but considerably less expensive than a nursing home. But people with Parkinson's or dementia are going to need nursing care in the end.

I also agree that inheritance tax is incredibly generous. You get a very large chunk of free money before you have to pay tax on it.

I think IHT is the most levelling tax there is. If you don't want to pay it, spend your money/give it away (7 years) before you die instead of leaving it in the bank earning almost zero interest.

You can bet your underwear (if you wear any) that if the SCOTUK judgement is 6/5 against the government, they'll seize on the "5" as being ^nearly legal.

I've seen a few discussions about the case, and a lot of history being bought up, noting that since the Bill of Rights, the government has replaced the Monarch in practice over time. A lot of the protections afforded by the BoR were specifically against the Monarch, and it's the passage of time which has seen those functions replaced - without any change in the BoR - by government.

So a fundamental question facing SCOTUK is can the government be considered absolved of the oversight of law because it's not mentioned in the BoR, or does the gradual eclipse of the Monarch by the government make them subject to the same restrictions ?

In the US a question like that would be considered by reviewing what the Founding Fathers would have intended when drafting the constitution.

The whole case has much wider implications than Brexit of course. There will me many UK investors who won't be happy if it turns out the UK government isn't bound by any laws. In fact I can see a radical Corbyn regime (or indeed any future revolutionary regime) being quite happy at that idea. Imagine being unfettered by law ? All the things you could do. Seize whatever property you liked, treat anybody how you liked. Pass whatever laws you liked.

I suspect the Home Office has really be trialling the idea for a while.

But I fear that he and his cronies actually WANT the consequences of not signing, as they get to complain about “ discrimination “ from Spain.

I could see this backfiring on Johnson and cronies though, as all those 'ex-pats' have to return, after having to sell their houses on the Costas at give-away prices.

BigChoc Populism is presenting people with an easy solution, more money, free care, rather than a complex plan that actually addresses the issues. I don’t disagree with free help with dressing and food, why would I? It is a crowd pleaser, an easy bite winner, like most people I would like to expect it is all I ever need. It is just I recognise it does not address the bigger issue of how you ensure the more complex needs of a growing part of the population are met and paid for, and easing the burden on the NHS, and indeed unpaid carers, of failing to do that. Help with dressing and feeding is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of meeting those needs in the home, let alone where 24 hour care and protection is needed. Even in the home you still have the issues of who pays for the Occupational Therapists and the equipment that needs to be fitted, the day centres providing dementia care, respite care, the cost of intervention with safeguarding issues etc etc etc

It needs the sort of governance we used to take for granted, evidence gathering, a white paper, cross party working etc to arrive at a detailed plan not just some easy crowd pleasing promises.

It needs the sort of governance we used to take for granted, evidence gathering, a white paper, cross party working etc to arrive at a detailed plan not just some easy crowd pleasing promises

Totally agree. And in the end I think people need to accept that we have to pay higher taxes for better services. Or lower taxes for lesser services. People can't have it both ways.

BirdandSparrow I'd expect that for all the E27, tbh, or they have no leverage for their own citizens

The EU itself has set minimum requirements, but after No Deal it doesn't have the power to control how members treat 3rd country citizens, which is what UK expats would be

EU regulations give 3rd country citizens the right to apply to stay after 5 years residence and being self-supporting without criminal record.
However, the EU cannot order its members to grant concessions like healthcare, recognition of professional qualifications, free / uni fees the same as domestic students .....
Many of the things that make living abroad possible in practice for many.

Those most likely to be hit are pensioners without private healthcare - because few would be able to get comprehensive insurance of a type that countries demand of 3rd country citizens
Even being well-off won't be enough, since some treatment could be a million quid

The NHS would be hammered if a 100,000 pensioners return to the UK

• the relevant HoC Committee found that paying for treatment abroad saves the UK money and also saves having to recruit more NHS staff and build more hospitals & GP surgeries

Some pensioners will have given up their private healthcare as soon as they became eligible for the S1 scheme, under which EU member states repay the host country for healthcare for all its citizens receiving state pension

• that may apply to E27 expats in the UK too, who may now be worried about NHS eligibility

Bozza Really doesn't want to answer questions about Jennifer Accuri.

Even the Currant Bun is curious:

www.thesun.co.uk/news/9983258/boris-johnson-affair-jennifer-arcuri-businesswoman/

I wonder if Spain is acting as a bellweather ?

I also wonder what sort of limbo hell any returning/repatriated citizens from Spain would face in the UK - not being able to claim benefits or access healthcare for the first months/years ?

There's also the less commented on social pressure of someone who has been waiting 6 months to see a consultant suddenly being told they have to wait another 6 months because returned ex-pats have been put ahead of them in the queue due to medical necessity. Meaning we could see "white-on-white" racism towards returned ex-pats ?

Presumably Boris is taking responsibility for that ?

Brexit cruises ?

metro.co.uk/2019/09/21/cruise-ship-passengers-stage-mutiny-luxury-tour-goes-great-yarmouth-10783894

I totally understand Spain's position, if I were Spanish in the UK, it's what I would want them to do. Of course they have to do this. But it is hugely worrying for me. The UK has just washed its hands of me.
I applied for Spanish nationality nearly 3 years ago to protect my status but I'm trapped in a massive paperwork backlog, with no idea when it will come through.
I've even got an Irish passport, but my ID number says British.

It's all so unnecessary. All I can hope for is an extension to give my Spanish nationality application time to be resolved.

I am so, so fed up with politicians and parties here in the UK. Yesterday I was in full-on 'not voting for any party in the next GE' mode, something I've never done before. They're all so depressing

You could look at Renew. But of course nobody will vote for them because nobody has heard of them!

Question - I was looking at the BBC website and it says "Labour pledges free care for over 65s". So what is the position if you are under 65 and eg have MND or early onset dementia?

Could a clear Remain position be imminent from Labour?

Laura Kuenssberg
@bbclaurak
·
4m

1. Unison is going to OPPOSE the NEC's wait + see Brexit position, then SUPPORT motion 13, and ABSTAIN on motion 14 - in other words, a huge union is breaking with Corbyn's position on Brexit today and wants to push the party to back Remain immediately

Laura Kuenssberg *@bbclaurak* · 2m

1. Might sound like gobbledygook, but it matters a lot - this shifts the balance of the votes and makes it more likely that conference, which is king, decides today to back Remain now - Corbyn has said on the record he'll abide by what is decided here

Laura Kuenssberg *@bbclaurak* · 1m

1. So the conference votes late this afternoon are massively important - Unison's decision is pretty straightforwardly down to a belief that Labour is more likely to win the election with a clear position

Unison's decision is pretty straightforwardly down to a belief that Labour is more likely to win the election with a clear position

At last the grown ups appear to have entered the room!

But people with Parkinson's or dementia are going to need nursing care in the end. Care homes have the staffing levels and expertise to provide that care. I have seen two relatives die as a result of dementia. In both cases the hospital doctors made the decision to stop treating the repeated chest infections that were resulting from being unable to swallow properly. They both returned to their care homes where they were looked after far better than they would have been in hospital by people they knew who had time and expertise to talk to them and reassure them and support the families, supported by the GP and district nurses. It is a different pathway than Cancer and whilst I agree it is unfair that if you get dementia you pay for care that many old people do not have the need to pay for whilst if you get Cancer you don’t, they are different pathways, it does fall into the social care system rather than the NHS (though of courses hospices too are often relying on non government funding for their existence) The need to address how we meet the cost of dementia care in the social care system includes end of life care.

Emily An essential element of "populism" is appealing to people while whipping up anger against an elite,
usually by sidestepping Parliamentary constraints and appealing over the heads of an elected parliament.

Populism is not merely "easy" solutions,
or solutions that you personally dislike because you want the money spent elsewhere

Personally, I would raise the money by increasing IHT
I would improve all social care, for children and adults of all ages, by e.g. stopping Trident as well

I base my wishes on trying to reduce the sheer amount of human misery and danger that the inadequate current system causes, both for those needing care and family members on thier knees trying to provide care.

Free adult care works in Scotland without demonising anyone or impoverishing other services

Free care is an amount of money that can far more easily be found than the huge amounts required for free care homes for all
It has tangible benefits - the Scottish experience is that it has reduced the number of the elderly admitted to hospital after falls or untreated ailments

It has the advantage that it would help people at all income levels, rather than just the minority of homeowners who need care homes being subisidised even more by those can never be homeowners

Watching "Comedians Giving Lectures" (Dave) a subject cropped up which chimed with something that may have been touched on briefly here, but which might be the way things are going, and that's the fact that we are seeing the rise of companies - Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook - that are effectively embyonic nation states. Maybe not geographically, but financially.

How many countries GDP does Apples share capitalisation exceed ?

And more pertinently, who has the faintest clue about the East India Company ?

The reason it's noteworthy is these big companies are starting to act like countries - treating any attempt at oversight and regulation as an "attack" and replying with lobbying, and all sorts of shenanigans (which they can afford from petty change) that are basically 21st century warfare.

I wonder how long before we see Amazon Security® with Prime membership ? Or before AppleCare® includes a "family security" option where uniformed guards patrol your neighborhood ?

I suppose it’s not really easy for me to be socialist when it comes to my own money and I see it in front of my eyes :-)

This is why most people aren’t socialists - they can count

I suppose it’s not really easy for me to be socialist when it comes to my own money and I see it in front of my eyes

For the love money is the root of all evil

"Money is the worst invention in human history. Discuss."