General Discussion
Last week I was on holiday in the Peak District.
On the Monday we visited Chatsworth House and marvelled at its splendour, its riches, its landscaped garden etc. This, however, is a diminished estate compared to what it was not so very long ago as much had to be sold off to pay a huge inheritance tax bill. Indeed, it was the inheritance tax bill which I believe led to it being opened to the public (we bring in dosh).
On the Tuesday we visited an old cotton mill, saw several looms in action and were told about the working conditions of the workers who worked there circa 18th/19th century. So noisy were the looms that the workers could not speak to hear so had to develop sign language to communicate. Working for poverty wages. No health and safety so many of the working parts (and boy are there loads of working parts!) were exposed. This led to many accidents and those who were maimed and unable to work were out of the door (literally). Work house awaiting?
What struck me the most was the difference in living conditions between the Cavendish family (that's the Dukes of Devonshire) and their wealth and opulence and the lives of the extremely poor cotton mill workers. Both living at exactly the same time. Not so very many miles away from each other geographically but millions of miles away from each other in virtually every other aspect.
I've been pondering on how things have changed (or not) since those times.
Then I heard George Osborne's speech at the Conservative Party Conference yesterday............
Everyone was surprised he didn't do a vote catching speech...people would have been well quick to say ah its the election in 6 months. Poor Ed forgetting to mention the economy and imigration in his speech was so funny ..Gordon in Scotland looked fired up to be a PM again! ..then there is always Tony Blair.
From today's Independent:
"............Alison Garnham, chief executive of the Child Poverty Action Group, said the benefits freeze would be bad news for working parents struggling on low wages and already coping with rising living costs and previous benefit cuts. “A couple both working full time on the minimum wage are nearly a fifth short of the money they need for basics; another freeze will make it a whole lot harder for them,” she said.
Matt Downie, director of policy and external affairs at Crisis, said: “Further cuts to housing benefit would be cruel and counter-productive. Homelessness shatters lives and it is hugely costly to the public purse to help people put the pieces back together. It is far better if they never have to go through it in the first place.”
Julia Unwin, chief executive of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, said: “The plan to freeze welfare for two further years will make things worse for our economy, with more people living below the poverty line leading to lower tax revenues and the wasted potential of millions. The economy is beginning to recover, but for people on low incomes, the forecasts are heading in the wrong direction.”
Frances O’Grady, the TUC General Secretary, said: “In today’s low-pay Britain, in-work benefits are a lifeline for millions of families. Working families have already been hit by three-quarters of the total cuts the Government has made to welfare and now the plan is to put them in the front line again.”
Fiona Weir, chief executive of Gingerbread, which represents single parents, said: “Freezing benefits paid to people coping on low incomes, such as working tax credits, means making some of the poorest in society bear the brunt of cuts. This new cut would put intolerable pressure on those who have already been hit disproportionately by the recession and public spending cuts.”