I (Kat) took the minutes this time so they are not as detailed as they normally are!
1. Apologies were sent from Blyth Crawford, Nina Killen, Celia Watson, Mike Nolan, Danny McGowan and Jane Heffy. The minutes from the last meeting and the meeting with the council party leaders were approved.
2. Kat said she would chase up the West Lancs pensioner's forum to see if we could help them with their travel pass campaign. FOAl have had their second meeting on 6/4/11 and we need to find out how it went and whether a friends group has been set up for birkdale library. Nina has been away and sent her apologies so there was no update about the meeting with the MPs but we assume no progress has been made. We may have to drop plans for the JR due to diffculties trying to get everything together and finding a nominated person and a solicitor.
3. "The Hardest Hit" campaign. We should do something to tie in with it. Carers UK are having a London march, rally and lobby on 11/5/11. Kat suggested we use the online form questions to collect people's stories in Southport and present them to John Pugh. Possibly we could do this in the libraries on a saturday. Most people agreed with this as a good idea. We need to check out the libraries for permission. John said he would forward a contact at carers uk that could help. John also raised the point that we need to make sure we have permission from people to collect stories and/or photos and use them. Anthony said he could be involved, Kat said she could do the town centre library, Terry can do Ainsdale, John Birkdale and Megan Churchtown depending on the dates. Steve suggested a facebook group called "keep disability living allowance" which could be a valuable resource.
4. Celia, Nina and Mike had sent apologies so there was no report from the London March. The Southport march was discussed. Kat, Steve and Anthony felt it was well attended but in view of the objections some had expressed about Terry and the political banners issue, Kat felt it was necessary to ensure that any reporting and advertising that was done in the future made clear the group's position about unity so as to avoid future confusion.
5. Kat mentioned that 38 degrees were lobbying John Pugh on 12/4/11 at 1pm and that there had been a union lobby. Kat will try to write them up for the blog if she can get information from the union but planned to attend the 38 degrees lobby. There is the Socialist Health Association meeting on the NHS is on Thursday at 7pm. Anthony, Megan, Steve, Kat and Nesta all plan to attend. Anthony and Megan booked places.
6. A journalist from the BBC has been in contact to speak about tax and public spending. Kat explained to the group some of what had been discussed about the HMRC inadequacies and the growing tax gap and how a budget deficit is the balance between tax income and spending - with an inadequate tax collection system we will never sort out a budget deficit, the differences between what the government are saying and what they are doing and her belief that the Government are trying to pass the debt onto households (which is technically what an austerity drive is), how whether there will be growth or even stabilisation is dependent on households taking on debt and how she feels this will not happen because people do not usually take on debt to cover living expenses, they cut back and are unlikely to borrow when they know interest rates are going to rise and their income is likely to fall, this is why austerity has worsened the economy in ireland, portugal e.t.c. How it is not any kind of stabilisation or growth that we need but the right kind. Kat spoke about how the deficit and debt are not at unusually high levels, that this is misinformation. That whilst a deficit is not a desirable thing, the deficit we have is manageable if we are sensible about it and is not a reason for such deep public spending cuts which could ultimately prove to be a false economy as with public spending generally if your don't spend early you often spend much more later. The group generally agreed that what was particularly bad was the cumulative affect of the cuts - not only are people's incomes falling fairly drastically but inflation and other costs are rising. As services are removed or charges are being applied to previously free things, all ordinary people are feeling more and more squeezed. Steve asked how losing so many jobs would help the economy? Ant said that we are told there is no money for vital services but then there is money for various wars and the royal wedding. Terry felt the VAT was the main problem, that it was a really regressive step. It was also discussed that in everything it is the percentage change which is a big problem - very clearly that if you have £5000 per week it isn't as much of a problem to lose £10 per week but if you have £50 losing £10 per week is very difficult - lots of the cuts are working in this way to target the poorest the most. Kat spoke about the real crisis being a wage crisis. The things with the deficit and debt are not as important as the massive problem we have with the private sector not paying its way and the structural problems with the economy. That the private sector has been subsidised through the tax credits system to get away with not paying the real cost of labour, that in addition to often employing tax avoidance tactics big companies also pay minimal staff in this country the least they can get away with and exploit third world labour for the majority of their work and keep profits for shareholders rather than workers which has very little benefit to the economy. Terry spoke about how a manufacturing base was very important. We then discussed how tax loopholes and destruction of the manufacturing industry has lead to wealth inequalities between the north and the south of Britain. In order to employ tax avoidance tactics it is important to be located in the south, near to the continent. Kat said she felt it was important that we make objective points rather than subjective.
Very interested to read the minutes and my apologies again that I couldn't be there. Peter was stuck at work in the end until 10pm so even without the football I couldn't have made it. I will try to chase up the MPs - I am in email contact with Joe Benton and Bill Esterson but not John Pugh - I will try to find his details (or please send them to me, Kat) and do another email to all three of them.
ReplyDeleteI was at my local children's centre this morning and suggested that they might start a donation box (out of the way so no one knows who has contributed and who hasn't) so people can pay for groups if they wish to. I felt if they could do that for 3mths or so while the review is going on they can get some idea of how much people are willing to pay, and this can go toward helping keep the centre open ie the review can use this info when making theit decision. Anonymous donations are what they do at my sister's local centre which is in a very deprived area in Lancashire. It seems to work well. Ideally we would want the services to be free but if it keeps the centre open and people in a job I think it is a good idea. The centre manager agreed but said they have been told that cannot change any of their working practices while the review is being carried out. No efficiency measures at all. I think this is short-sighted and if we can go ahead with the JR then hopefully we can use this info. I wrote a longer post but it got lost! Grr
Email wot i have sent to John Pugh:
ReplyDeleteDear Mr Pugh,
I am a doctor currently working in general practice in Southport. I attended the Socialist Health Association meeting last night and, like yourself, joined in the lively debate there.
From what i have seen and heard of you it strikes me that you are a well-meaning and decent man, are regarded as a good "constituency MP", and do not seem to be personally corrupt. In a political system that has become absolutely rife with personal corruption (as is inevitable in capitalist "liberal democracies"), that counts for a great deal.
However, it also strikes me that you are not particularly well-informed - neither about the reality of contemporary politics nor, importantly, about the historical, economic, and indeed philosophical context. As a result, you do not appear to have the necessary conceptual apparatus for evaluating the degree of the threat posed by the Tory Party's plans for the National Health Service. This leads you to have illusions about the potential for "improving" their proposed Health Care Reform Bill that are, quite frankly, naive in the extreme.
The correct approach, in contrast, is quite simply to oppose the Bill unconditionally, being wise to the Tories' inevitable plans to "sweeten" the Bill with superficially significant "concessions" in order to win predictably naive Liberal Democrat support for its passage through the Commons.
Once again, Mr Pugh, follow the advice and the pleas of your constituents whom you are duty-bound to represent: OPPOSE THE HEALTH CARE REFORM BILL UNCONDITIONALLY, AND ADVISE YOUR PARLIAMENTARY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Anthony Molyneux
[see also my open post for the attention of John Pugh on my blog: http//whatstheretosmileabout.blogspot.com ]
Email wot i have wrote to Councillor David Russell, Chairman of Lydiate Parish Council:
ReplyDeleteDear Councillor Russell,
I read in one of the local newspapers (i think it was the Maghull Star) that Lydiate Parish Council have donated £200 towards the funding of a pro-monarchist political rally planned for the day of the impending wedding of a Mr William Windsor, of Anglesey, to his girlfriend, a Miss Kate Middleton.
Quite openly, as i understand it, the proposed rally aims to politically indoctrinate children with pro-monarchist ideas. Now, i have two questions for you: Firstly, are you able to justify the channeling of public funds for the political indoctrination of children in this way?; and secondly, if you are, would you also be willing to agree to the extension of Parish Council funds towards a campaign to publicise republican/socialist/Marxist ideas in Lydiate? If so, i would be interested in making an application for such funding.
I look forward to your reply,
Dr Anthony Molyneux