Much Ado About Nothing

BallotBoxUK | No comment yet

Much Ado About Nothing

In light of the recent programmes on the BBC and a Channel Four, surrounding the benefits culture within the UK, Ballot Box UK investigates.

Skint highlighted a culture where many of the people featured were long term unemployed, many struggling to get by and survive on the handouts provided by the state. It showed a community struggling to come to terms with a loss of an industry. Many turned to the local drug addicts to "shoplift to order" goods that their benefits couldn't stretch to. However I do not deny that any of this isn't true, but it is a very extreme example of life on benefits. I do not think that Skint was a fair reflection of the majority of most people that are just trying to genuinely get a job and don't believe that the state owes them anything. It also showed a big family making the audience presume that the majority of people on benefits only have big families for the benefits they can reap, however there are only 1,080 families are out of work claim benefits, however the majority of people that are out of work (624,800) only have one child.  

In the main, the system worked against people that find themselves in a position where they have low skills, so struggle to find a job that makes work pay.

Even though it was painful at times to watch, Nick and Margaret: We Pay Your Benefits did show a different side to the benefits culture.  

Especially showing one of the most genuine families where the father applied for nearly 20 jobs a day, but he didn't want to take a job that didn't put his family worse off when in work. I do agree to a point that the benefits cap is a good thing to a point, how are families meant to feel when they work hard for maybe in some cases a lot less than £26000 a year. But what I do feel that the government should do for people that have poor or little qualifications is support them into gaining qualifications to enable them to make work pay. Then use gaining of qualification as an incentive for people to get benefits, maybe if people receive qualifications and a sense of pride with their benefits the system would not have such a bad reputation. 

  

Bananas for the EU?

BallotBoxUK | No comment yet

Bananas for the EU?

Are you bananas for the EU? Or even if you could not care less about the straightness of your banana, Ballot Box UK gives you a guide to the European Union...

The EU was formed in 1948 as a way of peacekeeping in Europe. So basically it was to prevent further world wars from happening. The starting point of the treaties in the EU was the Brussels treaty, this treaty was signed by Belgium, France, Luxembourg, UK and the Netherlands. However the UK did not enter into the EU until 1973.

The European Union has many insitutions, (places where decisions, laws and often mistakes are made) 

European Council 

The European Council sets the agenda of the European Union, so basically it is the body responsible for making sometimes ridiculous proposals such as how straight or bendy bananas should be. Heads of countries sit on the European Council, however it can't really do much as it does not pass laws.

European Parliament 

The Parliament is where the people that we vote for sit, it does not have much power but it does have influence as it is the only representative arm of the EU.

Council of the European Union

This institution makes decisions with the European Parliament, helping to develop common foreign and security policy. So this means that its job is to decide on what they think should be the EU's stance on other countries outside the EU.

European Commission 

This arm of the EU proposes laws, so is therefore one of the most powerful parts of the EU. It is completely neutral from the states that it represents. Does not have that much power over foreign policy.

Court of Justice 

This institution is the Supreme Court in the EU, this means that any decisions that it makes are final, no arguing. 

Leave those kids alone...

BallotBoxUK | No comment yet

Leave those kids alone...

Nick Clegg famously promised that he would not allow tuition fees to rise, in fact he signed a pledge that said he would "fight" for the abolition of tuition fees, so what changed? Ballot Box UK explains...

At the time of the last General Election in 2010, a pandemic dubbed "Cleggmania" had swept the nation. Nick Clegg had managed to trick the nation into thinking that he was a safe pair of hands to lead the country, little did they know that Clegg had other ideas. Anyway, back to Cleggmania, for the first time in years, Clegg offered an alternative to the two other main parties. His manifesto looked strong, he was saying the right things. He eventually gained power, but under the undesirable at best tory leader David Cameron. To the Clegg supporters and liberals anywhere this is the point that Clegg lost his appeal, he sold his soul. But hey, he'd managed something that no Liberal Democrat had managed before him, infiltrated Downing Street, and not just for dinner, he could stay for breakfast and a cabinet meeting too. 

In short Nick Clegg walks where no Liberal Democrat has walked before...

Tuition fees was one of the main policy ideas that made Clegg incredibly popular in the lead up to the general election, this is because his constituency is in Sheffield Hallam, a defiant and proud student area. With this in mind Clegg did something that was extremely devious or incredibly naive. He gave the promise that he would work towards: "Scrapping university tuition fees during first degrees" Would this have ever been possible? I'm not convinced. I would love to think that the government could afford  free tuition fees. It is also a massive kick in the teeth for todays students that the people whom are given the power to decide our future did not have to pay to study towards a degree. 

Long-legged Cleggy-Weggy buckled under the pressure from the other part of the coalition. The Liberal Democrats gave into the promise of something they had never had before, power. The main thing that they had to compromise on was tuition fees. He gave in, he not only compromised, he threw it out the window. 

The financial implications of attending university are now at an extreme level. They are a barrier to many being unable to attend university. Many middle income families struggle to afford to support their offspring through their degree as student finance does not often cover the cost of accommodation, never mind the living costs. It is fundamentally wrong that some families are held to ransom by the cost of university accommodation. Even worse that politicians think that it is right that they should hold young people back from studying at university level because of a money saving exercise that comes under the disguise of Fiscal Policy.

     

Cameron's Millionaires Boys Club

BallotBoxUK | No comment yet

Cameron's Millionaires Boys Club

Who's in the cabinet? What do they do? Ballot Box UK gives you a guide to the main movers and shakers who inevitably fuck up the country...

George Osborne 

He cried at Thatcher's funeral. He's the chancellor of the exchequer, this means that he does very complicated maths to tell us that we still don't have any money, nor will we have any for a few years. Overdrafts for all.

Theresa May

Once announced to the country that the reason a person was able to stay in the country was because they had a cat. That aside she's the Home Secretary and champions women in politics. The Home Secretary is in charge of the Home Office, so basically she runs the department that controls controversial issues such as immigration and oh that small matter of deportation. 

William Hague

Old Mr. Hague has a boring voice, but he's from Wath! He's the Foreign Secretary, so deals with any matters that may concern the UK abroad, so can be seen frequently hanging around in Brussels, and recently Angelina Jolie as her role as a UNICEF ambassador. 

Vince Cable 

Vince Cable in 2010 decided that he would declare war on Rupert Murdoch, over Murdoch's bid to takeover BSkyB, this was the ultimate declaration of war, ultimately ending Murdoch having to close a newspaper, which was no skin off his nose, he just said he had no idea about anything going on his company (News Corporation) and everything carried on as normal. Played Vince. 

Phillip Hammond

He's the Defence Secretary, so his job is to make sure our troops are well equipped and trained enough to cope with war. He's not really pro gay marriage either, probs best to give him a wide birth...

Michael Gove

Hated by many, Gove was there when £9,000 was deemed to be a reasonable amount to pay for a university degree. Pretty much every teacher thinks he's poor at his job. He clearly has no experience of front line teaching and the demands placed upon teachers. 

Jeremy Hunt

Paxman called him a C**T. Says it all really... He's the health secretary so he's in charge of the NHS Budget and reforms. A highly controversial figure at the moment with the complete reshuffle of the NHS. 

The End of A&E?

Unknown | 1 comment

The End of A&E?

You've broken your leg, had a bit too much to drink, your grandma has had a fall and broken her hip. First port of call? A&E

For many, A&E is one of the most amazing services that the NHS provides. But why has it become one of the greatest headaches for the NHS, and politicians alike? This morning, MPs debated the pressure that often short staffed A&E units come under, often making the service that the NHS can provide unsafe. The blame for this should not be laid at the doors of the nurses or doctors themselves. Bureaucratic layers of management see wards as a cost-cutting exercise. Managers have ripped through the NHS, leaving no room for nurses or doctors in overstretched wards to effectively do their job. Most of these managers have no experience of front line care, so although they may be trained in financial management, how can they possibly be fully aware of the needs of A&E wards.

The expectation of A&E is that it should be a quick fix, you arrive with a problem, should been seen straight away and leave with a solution within the hour. However with the volume of people that A&E are expected to deal with and the amount of staff available this is not possible. By placing too many expectations upon the NHS, we have lost sight of the functions that we need it to perform, many arrive at A&E with symptoms that could be treated at home, therefore increasing pressure. We have all heard of the ridiculous reasons why people rock up to A&E, so I urge people to think before they decide to go to A&E whether the problem they have is actually a problem and not just a cold.

I think that A&E nor the NHS should not be based on targets, as it is obvious that targets are not an effective way of trying to improve standards. Targets on paper look like they could be effective, but they are sometimes more of a glass ceiling rather than a something to aim for. Many A&E wards only strive to just surpass the targets rather than go above them. This not surprising as NHS trusts have been ordered to make £20bn worth of savings by 2015. I think that it is wrong to base life and death situations on the financial implications of the treatment needed.

According to The Independent, "Nurses and doctors are forced to routinely sacrifice patient privacy and dignity" and that in my opinion is wrong and something that money cannot buy, people who are ill deserve the upmost respect and dignity something that seems to have been lost not just within the ranks of the NHS, but also with modern day society.