TORY RACISM ALIVE AND KICKING IN 2012

A few days ago the Government for the first time ever released figures relating to the number of foreign born people who are currently claiming working age benefits in the UK.

It's own headline figure of 371,000 soon became headline news in all the Tory Press

370,000 MIGRANTS ON THE DOLE

said the Telegraph who added:

"The migrants, who can claim unemployment, housing and incapacity benefit, are costing taxpayers billions of pounds a year."

NON EU IMMIGRANT BENEFIT SCANDAL

screamed the SUN and told us in a follow up story that:

"FURY erupted last week over the news that we are paying dole to 371,000 foreigners." 

The Daily Mail not wanting to be upstaged by its red top fellow bigots went even further

  THE FOREIGNERS BEING PAID £2 BILLION IN BENEFITS A YEAR INCLUDING 371,000 ON THE DOLE 

and then let Tory Employment Minister Chris Grayling rant on for them when he said:

Conservative general election poster 2010 Romford

"It is not acceptable that people from other countries can claim our benefits if they have not worked or paid tax in the UK. We will root out those claimants who cannot prove their immigration status and in turn they will be stripped of their benefits.

Forgive me if I don't go on to give extra blog space to some of the more rabid and reactionary comments on the web from the usual suspects responding to the Governments carefully crafted press release, but I am sure you get the picture ""bleeding immigrants coming over here, taking our jobs, the food off our table. they're taking the piss, taking advantage of hard working British folk, claiming this, claiming that, living in big houses rent free when young British couples can't even rent a flat from the council..........you get the picture I am sure.

But hang on a minute what was Chris Grayling saying about people from other countries? and those who have not worked or paid benefits in the UK?

You see it turns out that about 54% of those "foreigners" Chris Grayling is ranting on about are actually British Citizens! and most of whom have worked and paid tax here in the UK. A further 29% it seems have been given indefinite leave to remain in the UK, and others are people from the European economic union who are entitled to claim whilst working in the UK. That's right working! because despite the smokescreen a large amount of the 371,000 above are working but receiving "Top Up" benefits to subsidise the low pay of unscrupulous employers.
So just how many of those 371,000 are actually foreign migrants illegally claiming benefits and left amongst Chris Graylings targets for rooting out?  er.... just under 2500! it seems, hardly the headline we were fed is it?

In fact the deeper you dig into the figures the worse it gets for the Government Of the 5.5 million people of working age in Britain who are currently claiming benefits, yes 371,000 are foreign-born, which equates to 6.4 per cent of the total number of people on benefits. That means 6.6 per cent of working age non-UK nationals currently get a state handout, as opposed to a massive 16.6 per cent of British nationals. And not only do less foreign born claim benefits from the state but they also pay more taxes to keep the 16.6 per cent of Brit's in the life style they have become accustomed to.

The ONF data goes hand in hand with Home Office research published in 2002 to assess that people do not arrive in the UK hoping to exploit the welfare state. This research found that immigrants pay more tax that they take in benefits, which was partly explained by the age structure of the immigrant population, which is disproportionately of working age and therefore consuming less state-provided services and paying more taxes.

Furthermore, the UK isn't exactly the welfare paradise for immigrants that some newspapers seem to refer to. Asylum seekers for example are not allowed to claim normal welfare and live on a paltry amount below that which the Government states is the minimum necessary for UK benefit claimants to be able to live. Many live in destitution, sometimes homeless, especially those who are appealing their case. The Refugee Council states that, “most asylum seekers are living in poverty and experience poor health and hunger.

So what therefore lies behind this official government press release and the predictable venom spat out by the right wing press to a nation wanting to believe that their current economic woes are all the work of Johnny Foreigner"?

The answer? RACISM, PURE AND UNADULTERATED.

Conservative General Election poster 1964 Smethick

It may be less up front than this poster left from the 1964 General Election, but this Tory leopard has obviously no intention of changing its spots

Tory governments in the past have played the race card as a smokescreen to their own internally created troubles and as always the media are only too eager to distribute racist and nationalist ideas such as blaming minorities and/or immigrants for unemployment, for so-called ‘benefit fraud’ and for the lack of resources like housing school places or hospital beds. It is easy to scapegoat vulnerable minorities and this official government endorsed racism ultimately sends signals out that foreign people are fair game for wider abuse from the public.

But Hate Crime is Hate crime in my view no matter who the perpetrator and I only hope that some of the British Citizens amongst the 371,000 affected above takes on Mr Grayling and his despotic government and makes a complaint to the Police

The CPS views this type of crime very seriously and say that "it has a real and lasting effect on individuals, communities and the whole of society. By letting people know what they can expect from the CPS when we prosecute racist or religious crime, we aim to improve confidence in the criminal justice system."

They add:

"Racist and religious crime is particularly hurtful to victims as they are being targeted solely because of their personal identity, their actual or perceived racial or ethnic origin or their actual or perceived belief or faith. Black and minority ethnic victims can also be targeted because they belong to other minority groups and may experience multiple discrimination."

This shoddy coalition government including the Lib Dem's who are backing them up in Parliament, and staying noticeably silent on issues such as this above should hang their collective heads in shame.

 

MARGARET THATCHER: AN APOLOGY

In light of the stomach turning behaviour of a number of politicians and public figures who recently in the media who have felt the need to grovel and apologise for any disparaging and/or abusive comments made against Baroness Thatcher, and after witnessing them being bullied by their party leaders or the press to issue an apology for any damage or hurt caused to her reputation or pride, I hearby give notice that I unreservedly refuse to apologise in any way shape or form for any comments made by me previously, presently or in the future in respect of this poor apology for a human being.


Furthermore, in the hope of informing debate on the current press speculation regarding preperations for the Baronesses forthcoming funeral ( I guess only after she has left this mortal coil) I hearby inform all parties interested of my signature to the following HM Government public e-petition stating:

Thatcher state funeral to be privatised 

Responsible department: Cabinet Office 

In keeping with the great lady's legacy, Margaret Thatcher's state funeral should be funded and managed by the private sector to offer the best value and choice for end users and other stakeholders. The undersigned believe that the legacy of the former PM deserves nothing less and that offering this unique opportunity is an ideal way to cut government expense and further prove the merits of liberalised economics Baroness Thatcher spearheaded.

I would therefore urge all my fellow social network friends to visit the following link

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/18914

and join me in allowing such an auspicious occasion to be treated with the same free market enterprising spirit with which Mrs Thatcher herself applied to the mining communities of the United Kingdom who will forever be in her debt for allowing them to diversify their employment skills and/or spend more time at home with their families.


I furthermore inform all those music lovers who may be interested that I have dusted off my personal copy of Elvis Costello's "Tramp the dirt down" and I attach a video copy here below in "You Tube" format so that the world and his dog can be in no way confused as to my real contempt and ill feelings towards the Iron Lady and her political contribution to the British way of life.

                                     

Tony

MUSICAL INTERLUDE (COURTESY OF CAPTAIN SKA)

Do you remember that wonderful Ska based "Liar Liar" track (below) put down last year by Captain SKA in appreciation of our wonderful Coalition government?

Well Captain Ska have been very busy since and I hereby gift you for the New Year their full (to date) catalogue.

Their latest release "WHAT'S THE POINT OF NICK CLEGG" is particularly poignant.

LIAR LIAR

SHAME ON YOU

SLIPPING BACK IN TIME 

WHAT'S THE POINT OF NICK CLEGG

Captian SKA and yours truly invites you all to share the above amongst your Facebook friends and email buddies to help them understand what is being done in the coalitions name!

You can also keep up to speed with the latest news and releases via the Captain's website http://www.reverbnation.com/captainska or through their easily found Facebook and twitter pages

A XMAS HOPE AND A NEW YEAR WARNING

Due to far too much Christmas Spirit and even more festivities and family visits approaching I rely this year on Lefty Lucy from the "Ask a Socialist" website http://freedomroad.org/askasocialist/ for providing me with a Xmas message for the blog.

Merry Christmas one and all, see you in the new year which promises to be truly awful, and for my own plagiarised contribution to proceedings After Lucy's great piece on Xmas below I have left you with an only slightly updated version of that infamous Kinnock Speech to preview with trepidation the year ahead of us

Do you hear what I hear? It’s the socialist messages of Christmas 

On the surface, Christmas appears to be an overblown capitalist orgy. Starting as early as October, we’re told to spend, spend, spend. But I’m here to tell you about the Socialist messages that have been smuggled into the Yuletide season. Yes, Christmas is just a delicious, sugar-sprinkled part of the Communist conspiracy.

Christmas history: A primer

Due to the inevitable cross-pollination that comes with colonialism, most of the modern Christmas traditions have their roots in pagan customs. Like Saturnalia, the Roman winter festival which permitted slaves and servants to dine with their masters. It was topsy-turvy day, when you could flout power dynamics and class codes. The social contract was formally abandoned for one night to allow raucous merrymaking among the underclasses. It was sort of the precursor to office holiday parties where you’re allowed to get drunk on egg nog and make fun of your boss.

Caroling can be traced back to the Mummers rituals of old Europe. Somewhere around Solstice time, villagers would travel from house to house, performing songs, dances, and pantomimes in exchange for food or money. They occupied each dwelling in the neighborhood with their drum circles and chants, in a lighthearted, insistent demand for cake and wassail.

"Profiting King Wenceslas" would not make a very good song.

It seems that the classic aspects of the holiday season were born out of traditions of empowering the poor. Don’t tell Goldman Sachs! Then there’s all the messages of caring, sharing and peace on earth. Not exactly the stuff of imperialist profits.

Scrooge is a reformed Capitalist who promises to share the wealth with human and Muppet alike. 
 
But the greatest purveyor of leftist ideals, the most radical agitator of them all, is Jolly Old Saint Nicholas. If you listen to those Bing Crosby tunes, you’ll learn that Santa, like time, is apparently the great equalizer. He brings glad tidings and gifts to all. According to one song, “he doesn’t care if you’re rich or poor, for he loves you just the same.” But I know his heart’s really with the 99%. He wears red from head to toe. He redistributes the wealth, chimney by chimney. He bears a striking resemblance to Karl Marx. And those North Pole elves are probably unionized in a worker collective.

Dreaming of a Red Christmas

Amidst the clanging consumerist bells of Christmas at the mall, there persists a reminder to care for the less fortunate and to extend goodwill to everyone, especially those who are most in need. So as the lefties that we are, let’s take the charitable spirit of the season a step further and think of how we can build a world where nobody needs to depend on individual charity, where not a creature is stirring in the shelters, bunkers, or prisons, because we’ve managed to put an end to war and poverty.

It’s a fantastical dream, but custom allows it this time of year. Let’s dream of a red Christmas. We can be like the holdouts of all the raided Occupy encampments, braving the winter cold because we want social justice and “we won’t go until we get some.”

A new year warning

If David Cameron continues as Prime Minister for another year then, I warn you

I warn you that you will have pain–when healing and relief depend upon payment.

I warn you that you will have ignorance–when talents are untended and wits are wasted, when learning is a privilege and not a right.

I warn you that you will have poverty–when pensions slip and benefits are whittled away by a government that won’t pay in an economy that can’t pay.

I warn you that you will be cold–when fuel charges are used as a tax system that the rich don’t notice and the poor can’t afford.

I warn you that you must not expect work–when many cannot spend, more will not be able to earn. When they don’t earn, they don’t spend. When they don’t spend, work dies.

I warn you not to go into Northampton's darkened streets alone after dark or into the streets in large crowds of protest in the light.

I warn you that you will be quiet–when the curfew of fear and the gibbet of unemployment make you obedient.

I warn you that you will have defence of a sort–with a risk and at a price that passes all understanding.

I warn you that you will be home-bound–when fares and transport bills kill leisure and lock you up

I warn you that you will borrow less–when credit, loans, mortgages and easy payments are refused to people on your melting income.

If Cameron and Clegg continue in this Con Dem Coalition then–

- I warn you not to be ordinary

- I warn you not to be young

- I warn you not to fall ill

- I warn you not to get old.

SALE OF THE CENTURY

I have little doubt that 2012 will see a big move forward in the building of the long awaited extension to the Grovesnor Centre, and as a result local politicians will crow their success in rescuing the town centre, others will be quick to welcome a positive sign for future prosperity for our town. But what will actually be built? And who will have really paid the bill? And what will be the long term costs to local tax payers?

I was a member of Northampton Borough Council when it signed its "historic" deal with Legal and General and as leader of the Independent group I was shown the details within the contract, Because of a commercial confidentiality clause I was prohibited from revealing the details, however I can still express an opinion without having to divulge the figures.

I have already intimated in public that I believe that the price paid by Legal and General for the Bus station and surrounding land packages was far too cheap, yes this deal was done in the height of the recession, but the over eagerness of the politicians to do a deal at any cost in my mind gifted the land and property to L&G at a price they could not refuse.

Moreover the deal as we now have had revealed, left the cost of moving the Bus Station and the cost of it's replacement together with the cost of paying off the existing tenants at the bus station (Stagecoach) solely with the council, and ultimately you and me, local taxpayers. Why Stagecoach were ever given such a long and rewarding lease in the first place is a complete mystery to me, after all I remember when they sold there own bus station on the Bedford road for housing development and then turned up overnight to park their buses at the councils bus stations as squatters with no rights at all. But now we must pay them £5.5m to move out!

In addition we must also pay an estimated £8m to build an inferior bus interchange on the Fish Market site. The deal between the Council and L&G will also see a change to car parking operations in the area and New Cllrs would be well served in revisiting just what deals have now been struck and how much extra this will also cost the taxpayer in lost revenue in years to come.

If any new Labour Cllrs at the Town Hall want to make a name for themselves I suggest they submit the following questions to the Council:

What is our current surface and multi-storey Car Parking land holding in Northampton Town Centre?

How much of that is included in the sale of Land to Legal and General?

What is the current annual income from those car parks proposed to be transferred to L&G?

What annual income will the Council recieve from these car parks thereafter? and:

Who will make up any difference in revenue?

So overall in my view L&G seem to have done very well out of the council, a knock down price paid for the land, the taxpayer picking up all the costs of moving the bus station, a potential new income from car parking, not to mention the new rents from any new stores attracted into the new build (hopefully not from the existing high street) But I still fear a further twist, what's the betting that what is finally delivered is but shadow of what was originally proposed? A scaled down version of all of those iconic plans so far revealed?

It is my view that the both the last Liberal Democrat and the current Conservative administrations at the Town Hall have both been so blinded by the desire to deliver something, that they will in fact accept anything. It is also my belief that we the taxpayer will in the end pay the most for their weak negotiating skills.

I suggest to both groups that if they want to prove me wrong then we can always examine the deal line by line in an open scrutiny committee so the public can judge for themselves whether we are getting value for money from this whole fiasco.

I have long held the view that in any multi million pound negotiations that if both parties say that they are so much in agreement then in reality only one party is actually doing the thinking and as a consequence only one party will come out on top.

On that score I guess I should congratulate Legal and General on their adeptness and savour-faire and commiserate with the public for having to pick up the bill.

IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID (part three) AROUND THE WORLD

In this 3rd and final part of our plain English guide to state we are all in we look beyond the UK's shores and identify that he banking crisis of 2008 hit not only the UK, Europe and the US, its aftershocks were felt across the globe, China and India's economies for example may still be growing faster than anyone Else's at present but if their continued growth is to be maintained then they need a market for their goods they are producing abroad and if the rest of the world is in recession and no one is buying those goods then that will have its own negative impact. This "world view" of the economic troubles facing citizens around the globe is also accompanied by a series of infographics which I hope assist with the explanations to enlarge on any diagram just click it

But before we can make total sense of what the current crisis is doing to the economies of different countries and how it affects us here in the UK we have to understand where we as a country sit at the table as a player, and also where we are expected to be in future years based on current and historical growth. In the UK this is critical because as you will see from the infographic below the UK economy is due to contract sharply irrespective of any current downturn.  So irrespective of the recession we are already facing an expected drop in our wealth and position as China and India and others take their place at the top of the manufacturing league.

But Britain's real fragility is only really exposed in its totality when you compare the contraction in our own growth and income with a much broader set of countries including those outside of the top ten above. This next chart therefore shows just how close Cameron and Clegg's cuts without growth programme has put us in comparison with those economies like Greece, Ireland and Italy which are presently close to collapse.

 

 Are you worried yet? well you should be as thanks to Cameron's go it alone stance in Europe we are isolated even further and unlike those in the Euro Zone we have no one to bail us out if the market takes a run on the pound.


The next nettle for us to grasp is how big is the UK's debt when measured against other countries in the world, and what do the credit reference organisations (see below) think about our ability to being able to pay the money back? Just like individuals having a credit reference record, so do countries and the biggest credit reference company to rate countries is a company called Standard and Poor's, ironic really when you consider that our banks seem to have no standards and their actions are making us all poor! Anyhow a reduction in your rating, (ratings go from AAA+ to C-)  just as with any individual makes it more difficult for the country to borrow more money which then pushes up the interest rate that they will have to pay to borrow, which in turn increases the GDP to debt ratio which ends up with Standard and Poor reducing the rating even further, in other words the banks make the debt ridden countries pay more for their borrowing because they say the risk is higher which in turn effects their rating which pushes the interest rate up even further and they go round and round in circles until they can/t afford to borrow from the banks at all, at which time they are in need of a hand out from the IMF (International Monetary Fund) or the European Central Bank. This next graphic is very revealing in not only showing you the ratings but also in understanding who is close the edge and who could be next for the vultures in the City to circle around

As you can see the UK's debt as a % of it GDP (what we earn) is very high at 83% and rising but it is nowhere near some of our other competitors. Ireland and Italy and of course Greece all with 100% + GDP/Debt ratios have all seen runs on their economy recently and have all faced and still may face financial meltdown. All have lost their (A) ratings and have been downgraded to B's and yet Japan which owes a massive 229% of its GDP still hangs on to an A rating (albeit AA-) so why is this?

Well Standards and Poor's take into account a Countries growth projections, and Japan is still seen as a good bet in terms of its manufacturing base, It is also worth noting that the above figures are also based on earlier 2011 forecasts predicting the UK growth figure way above the actual achieved. In reality because the current government are now planning to borrow even more than the last Labour Government planned to borrow if elected, due to increases in welfare payments and a period of flat growth, we now risk the UK's rating also being downgraded.

Standard and Poor's have in fact hinted at a rating downgrading of all countries within the Eurozone, which seems crazy given that there is a vast gulf between the performance of say the Greek and Italian economies when compared with say the German economy, but their excuse is that Germany and others may have to pay more towards any bailout of Greece or Italy and therefore their rating as well as the ratings of more indebted countries also has to be altered.

In other words a butterfly flaps it's wings in Athens and the aftershock is felt all the way over in in Berlin. It is in this context that David Cameron's disastrous walk out at the recent Euro summit last week. simply adds more fuel to the pessimistic forecasters who will now say that without all 27 countries committed to a Euro rescue plan the markets will not be satisfied. the markets then of course say they are not satisfied as they make money out of each and every crisis and the whole merry go round continues. One question of course for David Cameron and the UK is that if we are not going to be there to help back up the Euro in its hour of need then who will come to our aid if there is a run on the pound? also as most of our import and export markets are within the Eurozone then what happens to the British Economy if the Euro goes belly up?

My old comrade Dennis Skinner was right to call Cameron a plonker in the Commons last Wednesday but you have to wonder how foolish the PM must have felt having issued such a ridiculous ultimatum to the other 26 countries. I imagine a David Cameron stood at the door of the meeting room saying "Give me what I want or I will walk" "Au Revoir" and "Aud Weidershen" came the reply "and shut the door as you leave" This followed by "Call me Dave" walking very slowly down the corridor shouting "I mean it, I won't be back" to sounds of cheers coming from behind the now closed door. I imagine he was even asking the airline staff in the departure lounge whether or not anyone had phoned to call him back.

Whatever the truth about those fateful non negotiations, we have now as a country have put the Euro even more at risk, and as a consequence potentially damaged not just the latest Euro rescue plan but also massively weakened our position with our biggest trading partners.

And that's enough bad news for one day and where I will leave it for now, but I do hope this short series has informed and assisted people to get their heads around the core issues surrounding the world recession and also where the UK sits.

I also hope the graphs and infographics have helped, they are all up to date and where possible I have provided the source in order that you can check for yourself the data, but the most frequent comment I hear from people is that they just can't get their heads around the figures and the size of say a billion pounds or how one debt compares with another, so I have saved you my final infographic to give you a comparative view.

The billion pound o gram was produced back in 2009 by the guardian after the banking crisis had first hit in the year before. The deficit between what we earned and spent was £175bn, but how does that compare with say how much we spend a year on trident or the cost of Local Government across the UK well below you have the answer in scale. So now you know that political manipulation by the current government in reducing Local Government spending by a few % here and there is but a drop in the ocean when compared with the cost of bailing out the banks which caused the crisis in the first place. More on the billion pound o gram can be found here http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/nov/27/billion-pound-gram-inormation-beautiful#_

 

ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID (part two) THE MICAWBER PRINCIPLE

When I arrived at Kings Bench Prison Mr. Micawber was waiting for me within the gate, and we went up to his room (top story but one), and he cried very much. He solemnly conjured me, I remember, to take warning by his fate; and to observe the other piece of advice he had given, "Copperfield" said Mr. Micawber,

"You will remember, annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the god of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and — and in short you are for ever floored. As I am!" 

After which he borrowed a shilling of me for porter, gave me a written order on Mrs. Micawber for the amount, and put away his pocket-handkerchief, and cheered up.

Mr Micawber's good advice to David Copperfield is as sound a financial principle as you will ever find, you see economics is not difficult at all, it has always been about ensuring you never spend more than you earn, or if you do them only borrow what you can afford to pay back from within your earnings. And so it was that the last Labour government on a pretty good record of previous prudence found itself logging on to the equivalent of a multi national wonga.com to ensure it could pay its way after spending a fortune bailing out the banks in 2008. Below we take the Micawber principle a step further and align it to the UK economy, the graphs alone make interesting viewing and if you want to look in more detail just click them and they will enlarge, just like the countrys debt!

Like any household, UK PLC has an annual income and an annual expenditure budget, it is only the figures that get bigger, so what does (or did!) the country earn in a year? What does it spend? And where does the money come from and go to? If we look at the years running from 2002 up to the 2008 Banking crisis and we will see that the total income and expenditure of the UK government was pretty much in balance Our income from 2002 (roughly £430bn) to 2007 (£544bn) was rising steadily this of course is mostly made up of tax income together with money from any sales of government property or stock. Our planned expenditure each year was planned on the expected income the same as you and me would set up our direct debits and plans based on our expected monthly pay checks. Sometimes expenditure was slightly ahead of income and sometimes the other way around but it was manageable. The chart left shows income and expenditure per capita (which means per person) in the UK as you can see the amount they earned from each of us was rising year on year and in 2007 we were paying out about £8300 each to the government and recieving about £8,800 back in service, but then in 2008 it all went Pete Tong


In fact the data is remarkable: from 2002 to 2008 the difference between income and expenditure over the whole period was just £6bn – or 0.2% of total income for the six year period. In three years prior to 2002 we even had a surplus and was able to pay back on our debt bill. During that period the total we owed in long term borrowing (the equivalent of the household mortgage or outstanding loans and credit) hardly moved and stayed around the £500bn mark this was the equivalent of just one years income, in other words its like the average couple both working and jointly earning £40,000 a year only owing £40,000 on their mortgage and credit cards, it was manageable.

As a result here was little or no borrowing problem. Nor despite the politicians claims was there excessive spending – it was funded on a "living within your means" Micawber principle. Until 2008 that is when it is not spending that is excessive, but the fact that income falls off a cliff and we spend a fortune on bailing out the banks, and that is where our problems started. Government Income though should not be confused with GDP (Gross Domestic Profit) GDP refers to the total market value of all goods and services produced by a country each year, and is usually about 3 times what the government actually earns. I prefer to stick to the real income but GDP is important in economics as borrowing is always measured by the banks as a % of a country's GDP to see if they can afford to borrow any more, just after the second world war when Britain borrowed to rebuild our borrowing as a % of our GDP was a massive 240% of our GDP (2 and a half times what we all earned) in fact in the early to mid1800's it was even higher (more wars to fund) but from the 1970's onward it was at almost record lows before the crash in 2008 the % was around the 40% mark but now it is rising ever closer to the 100% levels last seen in the early 1960's.


So lets look at the nations debt and borrowing year on year from 2008. In 2008 we owed £525bn in 2009 we borrowed a further £91bn and now owed £612bn in total, in 2010 when the coalition came to power we borrowed a further £143bn and owed £759bn and this year 2011 we are looking to borrow a further £150bn to bring the total to £909bn in fact because the new government has stifled growth and the benefit bill has increased to pay to keep people on the dole the treasury estimate that the debt will rise to £1046bn in 2012 £1164bn in 2013, £1251bn in 2014 and reach a whopping £1314bn in 2015. The Tory/Lib Dem coalition have now accepted that they will have to borrow more than even the last Labour Government had planned to borrow (an extra £40bn) during the same period.

To explode another myth over which government (the last or this one) is spending more in government spending in 2009 was £621bn in 2010 it was £660bn this year 2011 it is planned to be £683bn and next year 2012 we are planning to spend £760bn

IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE WE CANNOT GO ON SPENDING AND BORROWING UNLESS WE ARE EARNING ! AND WITH RECORD NUMBERS ON THE DOLE AND INCOME TAX FALLING THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT ARE MAKING MATTERS WORSE NOT BETTER

Lets look at what we have been spending and plan to spend on the welfare state in order to keep public sector workers on the dole. In 2009 the welfare budget was £94.47bn in election year 2010 it was £106.69bn this year it is £109.48bn and next year 2012 £110bn. That's £16bn a year more than the last government was spending on those who are inactive. In addition every worker we put on the dole reduces the income tax income and shrinks the high street spend. The total income tax received by the treasury has shrunk from £152bn in 2009 to just £140bn now, another £12bn deficit to be paid for, meaning that so far the bill for Cameron and Clegg's cuts programme just on increased Welfare and lost income tax revenue is £28bn a year. Pension payments which are also affected by the lack of donations to the NI budget are up a further £20bn a year pushing the deficit ever higher and growth is non existent and we are paying out more in benefits and borrowing more and more each year to fill the gap left by reduced income tax receipts and higher debt charges.

So going by the rules of the Micawber principle that we are earning less than we are spending of course there is a need to cut expenditure, but should we be reducing our income at the same time by working less? The only way to close the gap is to increase not decrease our income and encourage growth. Why are we sacking public workers who earn little and provide vital services when it pays us to keep them working and spending? Why pay out to a household £30,000 a year in unemployment and housing benefit when you can put the same household to work doing something useful for the same money and increase the income tax income of the country and encourage spending in the economy? as the chart above shows we are as a country spend ever more on keeping people inactive and as a result can not afford the extra cost of education and healthcare without more income tax coming in and less welfare payments having to be paid out.

As well as these short briefings being delivered in plain English I also believe the truth is always better served in small bite size chunks, and thats enough figures for one day so here ends part two of our short series. In part 3 we look at how other countries are faring during the world economic crisis, but as you can see from this chart on the left it's not a pretty picture, for anyone and we will also look what the euro has to do with us and whether or not Britain thanks to David Cameron's weak negotiation skills can really stand alone during what is a deepening worldwide recession.

"IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID"

Why are we never really told in language that we can all understand what is really happening with the worlds economy?

Is it simply a case of treating us like mushrooms, constantly left in the dark and fed on manure in the hope that we will not ask too many awkward questions?

Recently I have been asked by a number of people (usually over a drink) to explain to them what is really happening to us all, and so I decided to commit it to print for others to take in and question, I would appreciate it your views.

THE STATE OF THE UK ECONOMY IN PLAIN ENGLISH (PART 1)

Background:

First of all to understand the mess we are all in now, and how bad things really are, we need to understand how we got into the mess, and also who was responsible for us getting us in the mess in the first place. Basically during the 1990's, and into the early 2000's Banks across the Western world particularly in the USA but also in part in Britain started to relax the rules on lending money to house buyers who were encouraged to take out bigger and bigger loans. In more responsible times people looking to buy homes were usually advised to borrow no more than three and a half times their total single/joint annual income, but all of a sudden banks were giving mortgages out like confetti, in the USA few checks were taken on whether or not people were able to afford to pay back the loans and even benefit (Welfare) claimants were being given mortgages despite their income being far lower than the repayments!

The Banks then sold that debt (they would package 100's of mortgage loans into one bigger debt) onto bigger financial institutions to try to reduce the risk to their own bank. And then the bubble burst as the financial institutions who now were left holding the risk suddenly found out that the people living in the homes couldn't afford to pay back the mortgages and as a result repossessions rocketed. As a consequence some of the Banks and the super banks went bust and no one had any money to lend out to anyone. This of course had a massive impact on other businesses who now couldn't borrow from the banks to either expand or even cover short term cash flow problems, so the economy started to slow down, people were laid off, who then couldn't pay the mortgage and the whole cycle went around and around. Meanwhile the value of peoples properties were also falling meaning people owed far more than they could ever sell their homes for, but even if they could afford to sell them potential purchasers also couldn't anymore get a loan from the banks. During the boom banks would lend couples 100% of the cost of the house and even more on top in some cases, but now the banks wanted deposits and restricted total loans down to 70% to 90%. First time buyers couldn't even afford the deposits and the housing market stalled.

The crazy thing here though thing is that the big financial institutions were so tied into the world economy, that they knew that they could take such risks with other peoples money and homes in the faith that the governments will come to the rescue with billions and billions of pounds in order to avoid financial meltdown within the stock markets. These people are still flying around in their private jets  and driving Bentley's whilst many who now live on the edge through in some cases bad decisions but others through  necessity whilst the banks continue their casino style gambling on the worlds banking roulette table. Traders even glout on the TV as to how wonderful the reccesion is and how every new collapse brings them more opportunities to make money.

The Labour Government:

Despite both the Tory and Lib Dem parties repeating over and over again like a mantra since the election in 2010 that it is all the Labour Party's fault, The Labour Government at the time  were not responsible for the meltdown, the reasons for that are outlined above however they cannot in any way be seen as just innocent bystanders in this mess.

They failed to implement any guidance to or legislation on banks restricting the amount of lending to avoid bad debts. They also let the finance institutions act exactly how they wanted without any meaningful intervention. The former Chancellor, Gordon Brown and to be Prime Minister at the time took his eye off of the ball and stood aside as the sub prime mortgage debts were being resold as good business.

Having given the Bank of England almost total independence he had no room to manoeuvre even if he wanted to, that coupled with a desire to keep his new job meant the country just drifted into more borrowing and less action.

The government also had left social housing projects solely within the private sector which would never fill the demand of such housing. A boost in public sector house building at the time in my mind might just have saved the day, but the lack of supply fuelled house price inflation to ridiculous levels.

Joe Public:

The other player in this sorry affair was the public at large who had become obsessive about house ownership, home improvement, buying things we didn't need and whacking everything on the plastic, as a result personal debt spiralled.

The feel good factor from the pre 1998 prosperity made a lot of people completely forget the self restraint of managing their debts sensibly. A must have, will have it now society, not even embarrassed by taking on extra debt they cannot afford. Now we are all paying the price. Housing costs had also rocketed and now took up more and more of the monthly salary as a % of income. We were all trapped in the credit card debt zone and unprotected against the ill wind that was blowing.

In part two (to follow very soon) we take a look at the Country's income and expenditure over recent years and try to make sense of the economy from a  Mr Micawber (Charles Dickens) point of view

 "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

in order to get our head around just what the country is earning, what we are spending and how we close the gap.

CONGRATULATIONS ALL ROUND

Wow..... first of all apologies for the delay in postings recently, I have working on a number of drafts but not  getting them finished, but I thought I would just post quickly to say well done to all of those who withdrew their labour today legitimately in a valid dispute with the government over pension rights and payments. How the government has got the neck to use the recession for their own warped political vendettas is beyond me. The whole deal sucks full stop, people pay in their money have an agreement and expect to be paid out on its fruition plain and simple, any attempt by the government to suggest anything other than the truth is unforgivable and the truth is equally plain and simple, they are asking public workers to pay 3% more in pension contributions in order to even work longer than agreed before they can then draw less pension  than they are currently entitled to! Its the equivalent in reverse of me going to my bank and saying "I know I agreed and signed to pay my mortgage over 25 years but I have had a rethink and now want to pay 3% less a month and reduce the number of years I pay it for and I expect you to give me a bit more on top" I wonder what my bank manager would say? As for Cameron's "Damp Squib" jibe, methinks that one may come back to haunt him.

Secondly my congratulations to Aidy Boothroyd for officially stepping into the hot seat at Sixfield's today, part of my recent downbeat mood has been due to the utter tripe being served up by the Cobblers this season by players who should be ashamed at the level of their under performance. Gary Johnson's time at the helm was a miserable period for all of us including him I guess but in the last few weeks the discipline of the players has been sadly lacking, they are not training at anything near full pelt and are far to laid back in their approach to both games and their professional responsibilities, I wish Aidy every success at the club and hope the players can prove themselves worthy once again of wearing the shirt.

And last but very much not least, congratulations to Cllr David Palethorpe for having the courage to up and leave the local Tory Party, I was surprised as I am sure many were by his Damascan like conversion over to the local Labour Party, but with Tory Councils at both the County and Town Hall's doing the bidding of a Tory government in an blatant attempt to destroy Local Government then the opposition needs as many hands as it can muster. I remember saying to an ex Labour colleague a few weeks back after the dramatic change of leadership that the Labour Group needed to put a motion down on a Unitary authority for Northampton at the next Council meeting to reveal the real tensions within the Conservative group and I wouldn't be surprised if this was not one of the reasons that David has taken his decision. Expect bitter times ahead between NBC and NCC as the cuts bite and the blame is levied.

I mentioned above that I have a few posts in draft so before I go here is a trailer, first of all I will be publishing a "Plain English" guide to explain the state we are in, and the economic difficulties we are now facing thanks to the failure of the banks, the current government and Gordon Brown's failed plan to hang onto power at any cost. I will also be updating you on the County Councils continued incompetence to deal with their unenforceable residents parking schemes and their attempts to drive local residents into bankruptcy rather than admit they are in the wrong.  BTW their appeal against my tribunal successes was dismissed as predicted because it was out of time and wasn't a proper appeal, the decisions were upheld and here I am three months later still waiting for them to write to me to inform me that the fixed penalty notices have been cancelled!

Also guess who has been reported to the Standards Board yet again? You guessed it, yours truly, it's the seventh complaint against me in 4 years! none of which have come to any where near a hearing. I am sorry I can't tell you what I have done this time to warrant such a allegation, as the letter as usual doesn't tell me what I am accused of, nor does it tell me who has made the complaint, but it does then go on to warn me not to discuss what they haven't told me with the complainant who they haven't named! Don't you just love the County Council! All this at a time that the government have scrapped the Standards Board for England and left Councils to decide themselves on how to punish wrongdoers! Maybe they will find me guilty this time and ban me from the Council for a month? but would I notice? Probably not, as they hardly ever meet and theirs more democracy on show in Cairo than their is at County Hall.

Speak soon, I have missed you

Tony

EXCLUSIVE: THAT RESIGNATION LETTER IN FULL

For some it seems the fun has only just begun on what is becoming an increasingly split Conservative group on Northampton Borough Council.

It has been just days since the new leader David Mackintosh posed for the Chron's photographer with certain members of his group, but with many of his colleagues even more noticeable by their absence.

But now the boot it seems is already on the other foot and certain Tory Cllrs unhappy about the outcome of last weeks coup d'etat have now started their own rearguard action.

It looks as if last weeks disaffected are this weeks leaders who are having to look over their shoulders at last weeks leaders being this weeks new disaffected? Where will it all end?

The leaking of David Palethorpe's resignation letter (published below) is I am informed just the start of a campaign to expose the real workings of the group, Much more ammunition to come I am told.

Anyway enjoy and I would be grateful to anyone who can answer the following questions:

1. If four of the six plotters are named then who were the other two?

2. Has Northampton North Conservative Association really been decimated? and if so is their recovery still faltering as suggested?

3. Who are the significant number of Cllrs routed in the past who wouldn't support Cllr Palethorpe at the EGM?

4. How if the group is split in two as it seems, will simply changing the people driving the bus stop the wheels coming off?

5. Is being a Tory Cllr simply about the money it can bring you in?

6. And just who owns that quoted comment " another fat pay cheque for 4 years"

I would welcome comments from all sources!

(Click on pictures to zoom in)

NB Since first posting this blog at 6pm this evening several people have contacted me all claiming to know who the source is. They will have to keep on guessing. One rumour I am happy to scotch however is any suggestion that the letter came from Cllr Palethorpe himself.  He I understand simply delivered it to his group Chairman, others must take responsibility thereafter for it's wider circulation. Indeed, I received it myself from two different sources!