The Social Welfare State is fundementally broken

We have a social welfare state that is the envy of the world (well some of it anyhow), evidence of this is the sheer number of people that want to come to the UK to take advantage of it.

The fundemental basis of our social welfare state is that it works so long as those contributing significantly outweigh those who take from it.

Recent figures show that between 1 in 6 and 1 in 4 (depending on where you are in the UK) are employed by the state, remember that these take out (for doing a job admittedly) in terms of their salary, and only recontribute a fraction of what they take out.

So there are two issues to address,

1. The number of people claiming from the state (I think the government is already focusing on this)

2. Those employed by the state

To concentrate on the latter, I've no idea what the ratio should be, but its pretty obvious that its unsustainable.

We need to find the right balance between those employed by the state and the delivery of local and central services. To start the process, we need to determine what the ratio should be, probably not as easy as it sounds, but it should be given a priority.

Once established, this needs to be used in concert with 1. to establish the amount we spend on delivery of local and central government services.

Why is this idea important?

We have a social welfare state that is the envy of the world (well some of it anyhow), evidence of this is the sheer number of people that want to come to the UK to take advantage of it.

The fundemental basis of our social welfare state is that it works so long as those contributing significantly outweigh those who take from it.

Recent figures show that between 1 in 6 and 1 in 4 (depending on where you are in the UK) are employed by the state, remember that these take out (for doing a job admittedly) in terms of their salary, and only recontribute a fraction of what they take out.

So there are two issues to address,

1. The number of people claiming from the state (I think the government is already focusing on this)

2. Those employed by the state

To concentrate on the latter, I've no idea what the ratio should be, but its pretty obvious that its unsustainable.

We need to find the right balance between those employed by the state and the delivery of local and central services. To start the process, we need to determine what the ratio should be, probably not as easy as it sounds, but it should be given a priority.

Once established, this needs to be used in concert with 1. to establish the amount we spend on delivery of local and central government services.

child abuse (are social worker’s hands tied)

Social workers must be given the powers to enter a home where a a child is suspected to be at risk.

The recent case of Khyra Ishaq who was starved and badly abused until she died, is an example of social workers inabilities to do their job, as they do not have sufficient powers.

They visited this house on at least seven occasions and only twice briefly glimpsed poor Khyra. They were unable to assess her condition.

Social workers should be able to call on police if necessary to force entry and insist on seeing a child in a way sufficient to enable them to assess the mental and physical condition of the child properly.

Why is this idea important?

Social workers must be given the powers to enter a home where a a child is suspected to be at risk.

The recent case of Khyra Ishaq who was starved and badly abused until she died, is an example of social workers inabilities to do their job, as they do not have sufficient powers.

They visited this house on at least seven occasions and only twice briefly glimpsed poor Khyra. They were unable to assess her condition.

Social workers should be able to call on police if necessary to force entry and insist on seeing a child in a way sufficient to enable them to assess the mental and physical condition of the child properly.

repeal the smoking ban

I believe that the main reason so many pubs and clubs have closed is the smoking ban and not the price of drinks. Thousands of smokers had their social lives ruined with the ban because for a smoker a drink without a cigarette is like an unsalted meal – bland and not worth the bother. I appreciate that some non-smokers find cigarette smoke unpleasant but a way can be found to keep all of us happy, Landlords could choose whether to run a smoking pub, a non-smoking pub or a pub which caters for both with designated areas for each. If this even-handed approach had been adopted from the outset we would not have seen so many people made miserable by taking away one of their main pleasures in life. Neither would there have been the closure of so many great traditional pubs which had been the mainstay of their local communities.

The type of smoker who has stayed away from the pubs since the ban is more often than not a hard-working taxpayer whose only vice is having a drink in one hand and a cigarette (or pipe or cigar) in the other – not a drug-raddled lunatic. We have lost so many of our beloved traditions in this country and I believe this ban is a step too close to a Big Brother society which hopefully no right-minded person wants.

Lastly, it has been a great relief to have the opportunity to voice the feelings of an ordinary person and believe it will be listened to. I think this sort of platform is a good way for the powers-that-be ascertain the feelings of the man-in the street.

Many thanks – and hopefully see you in the pub before very long!

 

Why is this idea important?

I believe that the main reason so many pubs and clubs have closed is the smoking ban and not the price of drinks. Thousands of smokers had their social lives ruined with the ban because for a smoker a drink without a cigarette is like an unsalted meal – bland and not worth the bother. I appreciate that some non-smokers find cigarette smoke unpleasant but a way can be found to keep all of us happy, Landlords could choose whether to run a smoking pub, a non-smoking pub or a pub which caters for both with designated areas for each. If this even-handed approach had been adopted from the outset we would not have seen so many people made miserable by taking away one of their main pleasures in life. Neither would there have been the closure of so many great traditional pubs which had been the mainstay of their local communities.

The type of smoker who has stayed away from the pubs since the ban is more often than not a hard-working taxpayer whose only vice is having a drink in one hand and a cigarette (or pipe or cigar) in the other – not a drug-raddled lunatic. We have lost so many of our beloved traditions in this country and I believe this ban is a step too close to a Big Brother society which hopefully no right-minded person wants.

Lastly, it has been a great relief to have the opportunity to voice the feelings of an ordinary person and believe it will be listened to. I think this sort of platform is a good way for the powers-that-be ascertain the feelings of the man-in the street.

Many thanks – and hopefully see you in the pub before very long!

 

Issue a Card for Benefits (no Cash)

The government could do a deal with a major credit card company to supply all benefit claiments with a card. This card could be set to not allow purchases of alcohol or tobacco (or any other goods deemed unsuitable). The acceptance of the cards could be limited to specific companies that have tendered for the supply of benefit goods.

  The right to accept benefit cards could be put out to tender ( as all other Government supply contracts are) and a selection of National and local stores become approved suppliers in a framework agreement. The contracts would be huge and a real discount could be negotiated from the retail prices in the stores.

Why is this idea important?

The government could do a deal with a major credit card company to supply all benefit claiments with a card. This card could be set to not allow purchases of alcohol or tobacco (or any other goods deemed unsuitable). The acceptance of the cards could be limited to specific companies that have tendered for the supply of benefit goods.

  The right to accept benefit cards could be put out to tender ( as all other Government supply contracts are) and a selection of National and local stores become approved suppliers in a framework agreement. The contracts would be huge and a real discount could be negotiated from the retail prices in the stores.

Legalize Cannabis As The Lib Dem Manifesto States

I voted for Mr Clegg and the Liberal Democrats, in part due to their policy on legalizing cannabis.  We can drink alcohol which is proven to be damaging, with no restrictions whatsover if we are not driving, yet as informed adults we have been oppressed and refused acknowledgment on this issue which is important to hundreds of thousands, if not millions of UK citizens. 

During the election campaign, the Lib Dem manifesto clearly set out the idea that to cultivate cannabis and pass it around consenting adults should be de-criminalised.  This is their pledge, that is why I ticked their box.  If the coalition government is to work succesfully, compromise must be in evidence of course, however key policies which sway voters should be examined very carefully so as not to lose credibility with the electorate.

The taxation and employment generated by adopting this policy will go a long way to assisting the much needed recovery, growers, sellers, retail outlets will all generate a fair income for the chancellor while at the same time driving the criminal gangs out of business in this area.

Many cannabis users are law abiding citizens from all walks of life, Mr Clegg himself has all but admitted using recreational drugs in the past, I know personally a doctor and a civil judge who regularly enjoy a social smoke.  We are not criminls, we are affecting no one else with our pastime.  The nanny state shoul be eroded and freedom of choice through informed debate should be encouraged.

Why is this idea important?

I voted for Mr Clegg and the Liberal Democrats, in part due to their policy on legalizing cannabis.  We can drink alcohol which is proven to be damaging, with no restrictions whatsover if we are not driving, yet as informed adults we have been oppressed and refused acknowledgment on this issue which is important to hundreds of thousands, if not millions of UK citizens. 

During the election campaign, the Lib Dem manifesto clearly set out the idea that to cultivate cannabis and pass it around consenting adults should be de-criminalised.  This is their pledge, that is why I ticked their box.  If the coalition government is to work succesfully, compromise must be in evidence of course, however key policies which sway voters should be examined very carefully so as not to lose credibility with the electorate.

The taxation and employment generated by adopting this policy will go a long way to assisting the much needed recovery, growers, sellers, retail outlets will all generate a fair income for the chancellor while at the same time driving the criminal gangs out of business in this area.

Many cannabis users are law abiding citizens from all walks of life, Mr Clegg himself has all but admitted using recreational drugs in the past, I know personally a doctor and a civil judge who regularly enjoy a social smoke.  We are not criminls, we are affecting no one else with our pastime.  The nanny state shoul be eroded and freedom of choice through informed debate should be encouraged.

Ban loud anti-social music in residential areas between 20:00 – 08:00

Loud music that is produced physically, electronically or mechanically should be banned between the hours of 20:00pm and 08:00am in residential areas if not from a licensed premises.

Why is this idea important?

Loud music that is produced physically, electronically or mechanically should be banned between the hours of 20:00pm and 08:00am in residential areas if not from a licensed premises.

Restrict the buying of Alcohol to support smaller businesses

I feel that the buying of alcohol has turned into a complete buyers market, I do not think that it is good for society on this scale and the supermarket giants are simply profiting from the general public's use.

My initiative would be to reduce the buying hours of alcohol as well as restricting the sale of it through licensed vendors only. I would suggest that it becomes only available for sale at registered off-licences of which have only a certain square footage of shop space and being only within a reasonable distance from each other. This would give the business back to the smaller companies and possibly start to encourage less drinking nationally.

As a separate idea which I would also like comment on, I think that we want to encourage more drinkers to use pubs and clubs rather than drinking on the streets and at home. Perhaps a tax incentive to make drinking in pubs cheaper would be a great option; this could be combined with making drinks available from off licenses more expensive as to keep the levels of tax received at a current level. This other idea would massively help landlords and ladies.

Rob

Why is this idea important?

I feel that the buying of alcohol has turned into a complete buyers market, I do not think that it is good for society on this scale and the supermarket giants are simply profiting from the general public's use.

My initiative would be to reduce the buying hours of alcohol as well as restricting the sale of it through licensed vendors only. I would suggest that it becomes only available for sale at registered off-licences of which have only a certain square footage of shop space and being only within a reasonable distance from each other. This would give the business back to the smaller companies and possibly start to encourage less drinking nationally.

As a separate idea which I would also like comment on, I think that we want to encourage more drinkers to use pubs and clubs rather than drinking on the streets and at home. Perhaps a tax incentive to make drinking in pubs cheaper would be a great option; this could be combined with making drinks available from off licenses more expensive as to keep the levels of tax received at a current level. This other idea would massively help landlords and ladies.

Rob