Wednesday, 31 March 2010

Hung Parliament

We are facing the General Election to choose a party that will govern Britain for the next 5 years. But as the different polls suggest, we may get a HUNG PARLIAMENT. If we accept the polls may become a reality on the 6th May when the electorate cast their votes in the ballot boxes, we may face certain problems.

Whichever side - Labour or Conservative - that tries to form a Government will not have its own way. It would have to include any alliance party's manifesto proposals to form a government. Any drastic measures proposed by the new Government to improve economic, social or health issues may not get through the legislature as the supporting parties' views might be different on those issues.

Late Lord Callaghan faced the same dilemma when his Labour Government was supported by the Liberal Party between 1974-1979. It caused economic stagnation, labour unrest, strikes and excessive taxation (both direct and indirect). Lord Callaghan sent Dennis Healey to the IMF to borrow money to prop up sterling.

It is quite common in other European countries to have coalition parties in the Government yet here it is very difficult to carry out the respective party’s ethos in coalition.

The Conservatives think the economy should run on free market principles and health and education systems should run in parallel (both private and public). There should be no unemployment money for young people who are not ill, not in education, not in training or not in jobs, they should be made to work for their benefit.

On the other hand, Labour traditionally supports blue collar workers. They view the Conservatives as the party for business, the privileged and for rich people. The labour party dogmas still exist as vast amounts of the party’s revenues come from the Unions.

So whoever forms a Government with the support of Liberal, SNP, Ulster Union party would not be able to be as effective as it should be in carrying out its manifesto promises.

So before long we would face another election to choose a party with a clear majority to form a Government.
Going by what happens in the other European Countries, I personally think it is better for democracy if the ruling party do not have an absolute majority, as it may cause the Government not to listen to the public on various issues i.e taxation, immigration, criminal justice system, health, social security, national insurance, VAT etc as they presume that they had the mandate to put their dogmas into legislation.

Shape of things

There are so many things to groan about - grist for my mill.

I used to be one of the " deeply concerned". Then I joined the "deeply worried". Lately, I realise that I have become both bewildered and confused.

I am suffering from information overload. It is my fault - but I find it hard NOT to listen, NOT to see and NOT to hear.

My post box is flooded with election "literature". I am promised a life of bliss not in the hereafter but NOW. If, ah if, I pay for it, ah yes - how much? When I die! There are in fact many solutions - sorry, there are three solutions but only one per party.

This is enough for the present. I could mention the environment, foreign investment in UK industries, energy prices, health and safety, striking railways, STOP!

No one mentions the flowering cherry trees . The weather report says that winter is loosening its grip which is a trifle dramatic.

Happy Easter everybody..........

Walter Vego

Wednesday, 24 March 2010

Child protection

Children must be protected, of course ... no argument here. This means to me that children must be protected from the adult world. There is no question of "contributory negligence"when a child is injured in any way. However, over the years it seems to me that the adult world is seeking ways to absolve itself of responsibility to the child. I know that there are laws regarding child protection but I want to draw attention to a small matter of the information given on medicines or materials likely to harm children.

I remember when instructions or information on any harmful material simply stated "Keep away from children". This was then amended to "Keep out of the reach of children". Something must have happened recently to have an addition to this, that is "Keep out of the reach and SIGHT of children". I wonder when someone will see fit to add "SOUND".

Perhaps the best way to protect children from harm is not to have them at all.

Walter Vego