subscribe to this blog:
Posts
All Comments
Showing posts with label Mark Prisk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Prisk. Show all posts
Thursday, 2 April 2015
Hertford and Stortford Ware hustings General Election 2015-
As you may or may not know I’m not the biggest fan of elections. But this coming April the debating society I am a member of are hosting the local hustings for the coming general election.
I am on the organising committee and am happy to help.
As you may or may not know I’m in no political party at all and am increasingly turned off by all party’s whether they be soft left or hard left.
I am struggling to mount any enthusiasm for any party to vote for.
As an anarchist now I should not vote at all which I stand by I don’t think I will. But the local situation has obvious interests to me and I am happy to help out and organise a hustings if that is what people want.
I feel it is fair and right that there is such an n event given the heightened awareness of politics in this current year.
Whilst I can’t lend my support to any of the candidates standing I do wish them well as there is a financial cost and also a physical cost in terms of the work involved.
In this hugely Tory Tory seat held by former housing minister MarkPrisk there is lots of hope from candidates hoping to make a dent in his 15 thousand odd majorities and I can’t see why not at present.
I as people well know am no Tory supporter and detest all that they stand for but as it stands mark Prisk has not agreed to join in with the Ware general election hustings to be held in the Ware Drill Hall on the 24th of April starting at 7.30 pm all welcome and no entrance fee required.
Standing for this seat will be the Labour party, Lib Dem's, UKIP, Greens and the sitting MP who is a tory as far as i know there is no one else at this stage .
I have my views on the Tories and Mark Prisk as a person given the replies I have had from him and his office down the years in disagreement with many of his ideas and party policies but I would for democratic fairness like to see him turn up on the 24th of April.
I would like to see him challenged and held to account as any MP or elected representative should be.
We currently have no reason as to why Mark can’t attend but I do hope before the 24th he will reconsider and join the hustings with the other candidates who have been more than happy to get involved.
As I said earlier I am part of a debating society called Cogers debating society which have continued the tradition of discussion and debate from a very very early time.
We are proud to host such an event in Ware but we are aware how big this election could be on the whole.
What happens in East Herts on the face of it may not matter too much but everyone in this area has a say and deserves to be heard. If they wish to turn up on the night they will be more than welcome and encouraged to join in and ask the candidates questions from the floor.
As a libertarian socialist with roots in economic Marxism and the ideas of anarchism as a practise I am not against all elections as a rule just I am not sure we as a class, the working class can gain much from any bourgeois election.
Even whilst I hold this view I still maintain a curiosity on how big elections go and who wins or forms the next government despite what we say will be a big thing and dictate how we react and take things forward as a militant class.
Please attend the Ware General Election hustings if you can
Venue: The drill Hall Ware, Hertfordshire, Amwell end
Time: 7:30 pm start advice to get in early to gain seat
Duration: roughly finishing at 10:00 pm with a scheduled interval at 9pm for an all to stretch legs or refresh yourself
Hosted by:
Ware society of Cogers
http://cogers.org/
Entrance: free to members of the public
Time: 7.30 pm to 10 pm --- roughly
Open to: all members of the public who wish to question the candidates for the Hertford and Stortford seat in the coming general election
Saturday, 8 January 2011
letter back from my MP about cuts to DLA
Today in the mail i recieved a letter back from my MP i scanned it in and thought you'd all like to read this. Very oddly someone else i know on twitter recieved the same response from their tory MP word for word. This smacks of laziness and as though they are acting like sheep with no brains to think for themselves for their own ideas.
here is the letter in full.
"Dear Mr Wright,
Thank you for contacting me about reforms to Disability Living Allowance.
I believe that the Government owe a duty to disabled people to promote their independence and equality and I also believe it has a duty to ensure that it has the right governance in place to deliver this support efficiently and sensibly.
The Government is already undertaking a large-scale reform of the welfare system, for example the Universal Crdit and it's flagship Work Programme. These welfare reforms are designed to protect people in the most vulnerable situations, including disabled people. The Government has made it clear that it is steadfast in its support for the principles of DLA, as a non-means-tested cash benefit contributing to the extra costs incurred by disabled people.
However, DLA is currently a poorly targeted and unsustainable benefit. Almost three million people receive this benefit at a forecast cost of £12 billion per year. We now have a disability benefit which is confusing for individuals to understand, based on unclear criteria and often results in inconsistent rewards, and since 1992, both the case load and the cost of DLA have grown to a level that is unsustainable. Change to DLA are long overdue and must address questions of fairness and value, while supporting disabled people to lead independent lives. We must ensure DLA better reflects the needs of disabled people today, rather than in the 1990's, and that it enables support to be targeted to those with the greatest need.
The Government wants to bring disability benefits into the 21st century by replacing DLA with a new Personal Independence Payment. This is an opportunity to improve the support for disabled people and enable them to lead full, active and independent lives. The Personal Independence Payment will maintain the key principles of DLA, but it will be delivered in a fairer, more consistent and sustainable manner. It is only right that support should be targeted at those disabled people who face the greatest challenges to leading independent lives and this reform is required to enable that, along with a clearer assessment process.
The Government has launched a formal public consultation on DLA and wants the views of disabled people to be fully reflected in any change it makes to DLA and has asked disabled people and their organisations to join the debate on reforming DLA. You may wish to make your views known and you can contribute to the Consultation by visiting website: http://dwp.gov.uk/consultations/2010/dla-reform.shtml
I want to assure you that those who are genuinely sick, disabled or retired have nothing to fear. This Government does not regard caring for the needy as a burden, but as a proud duty.
I hope that this reassures you and thank you again for taking the time to contact me.
Yours sincerely
Mark Prisk MP
this clearly shows my MP like so many others are ill informed and seem to not support disabled people one little bit. THis shows they want to rip into the welfare system and wreck peoples welfare and independance. Alot of this letter is waffle and clearly not their own ideas as someone else i know recieved exactly the same letter as this. Its poor and shows a lack of compassion to the sick and disabled in this country. It does seem you ahve to be severely disabled now to get any sort of benifits, even then yuo must prove it beyond doubt. Where is this country going making disabled people feel they are a burden on society. it is all wrong i tell you so very wrong.
here is the letter in full.
"Dear Mr Wright,
Thank you for contacting me about reforms to Disability Living Allowance.
I believe that the Government owe a duty to disabled people to promote their independence and equality and I also believe it has a duty to ensure that it has the right governance in place to deliver this support efficiently and sensibly.
The Government is already undertaking a large-scale reform of the welfare system, for example the Universal Crdit and it's flagship Work Programme. These welfare reforms are designed to protect people in the most vulnerable situations, including disabled people. The Government has made it clear that it is steadfast in its support for the principles of DLA, as a non-means-tested cash benefit contributing to the extra costs incurred by disabled people.
However, DLA is currently a poorly targeted and unsustainable benefit. Almost three million people receive this benefit at a forecast cost of £12 billion per year. We now have a disability benefit which is confusing for individuals to understand, based on unclear criteria and often results in inconsistent rewards, and since 1992, both the case load and the cost of DLA have grown to a level that is unsustainable. Change to DLA are long overdue and must address questions of fairness and value, while supporting disabled people to lead independent lives. We must ensure DLA better reflects the needs of disabled people today, rather than in the 1990's, and that it enables support to be targeted to those with the greatest need.
The Government wants to bring disability benefits into the 21st century by replacing DLA with a new Personal Independence Payment. This is an opportunity to improve the support for disabled people and enable them to lead full, active and independent lives. The Personal Independence Payment will maintain the key principles of DLA, but it will be delivered in a fairer, more consistent and sustainable manner. It is only right that support should be targeted at those disabled people who face the greatest challenges to leading independent lives and this reform is required to enable that, along with a clearer assessment process.
The Government has launched a formal public consultation on DLA and wants the views of disabled people to be fully reflected in any change it makes to DLA and has asked disabled people and their organisations to join the debate on reforming DLA. You may wish to make your views known and you can contribute to the Consultation by visiting website: http://dwp.gov.uk/consultations/2010/dla-reform.shtml
I want to assure you that those who are genuinely sick, disabled or retired have nothing to fear. This Government does not regard caring for the needy as a burden, but as a proud duty.
I hope that this reassures you and thank you again for taking the time to contact me.
Yours sincerely
Mark Prisk MP
this clearly shows my MP like so many others are ill informed and seem to not support disabled people one little bit. THis shows they want to rip into the welfare system and wreck peoples welfare and independance. Alot of this letter is waffle and clearly not their own ideas as someone else i know recieved exactly the same letter as this. Its poor and shows a lack of compassion to the sick and disabled in this country. It does seem you ahve to be severely disabled now to get any sort of benifits, even then yuo must prove it beyond doubt. Where is this country going making disabled people feel they are a burden on society. it is all wrong i tell you so very wrong.
Tuesday, 7 December 2010
Response from my MP on tuitian fees
Hi there this is a email i just recieved from my local MP who appears to be backing the tuitian fees rise. If people are interested these are his views below.
07 December 2010
Dear Mr Wright
Thank you for contacting me about Higher Education Funding.
The previous Government established a review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance which was chaired by Lord Browne. This Review proposed no limit on the fees for students. After careful consideration the Coalition Government has decided to cap the fees at a lower threshold of £6,000 with an upper threshold of £9,000. Universities will be able to set their own fees however, those Universities seeking to charge more than £6,000 will have to increase their efforts to attract students from lower-income families. To support those on lower incomes a £150 million National Scholarship Programme has been announced to which upper threshold universities will be expected to contribute funds.
In addition, graduates will not be required to repay any money until they have reached an income of £21,000, £6,000 higher than the previous threshold. This means that many lower-income students will be better off under the new arrangements which the National Union of Students and others fully accept. Only those students earning above £41,000 will repay at the full rate so again, this is a better offer than has been made before. Further to this, it will be the case that part-time students would have equal access to Student Loans just as fulltime students have which again represents a better deal than currently exists.
I raise the points above because they have often not been made clear to people when looking at the national headlines. These changes mean that the system will be far more progressive in helping those on lower incomes, than has been the case to date.
Having been a student myself I remember all too well the system that used to exist where those who overran their grants or did not receive sufficient support from their parents would run up overdrafts, often at fifteen or twenty percent in interest. Whilst the system then had some merit, it did not require many students to actually contribute to their education from which they would inevitably enjoy a substantially higher income.
This is a very difficult decision to take. As a new Government we have inherited a substantial deficit and it means that everybody is having to contribute more to balance the books. I personally believe that under graduates should contribute towards the cost of their education, not least because it will often lead to substantially higher incomes than would otherwise be the case. Further to this, I do not believe it is fair that those older people who have not had the benefit of a university education should subsidise younger people who will.
Cont’d/……
07 December 2010
I also believe that it is time we struck a better balance between a university education and vocational skills. The last Government actively encouraged young people to believe that only a university education would suffice. This has been enormously detrimental both to many young people for whom university simply isn’t right and the economy in starving us of people with the appropriate technical and vocational skills needed. So, whilst I appreciate the points that have been raised by a number of people I shall be supporting the Government’s proposals with regards to Higher Education and Tuition Fees.
Yours sincerely
Mark Prisk MP
(dictated by Mark Prisk and sent on his behalf)
07 December 2010
Dear Mr Wright
Thank you for contacting me about Higher Education Funding.
The previous Government established a review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance which was chaired by Lord Browne. This Review proposed no limit on the fees for students. After careful consideration the Coalition Government has decided to cap the fees at a lower threshold of £6,000 with an upper threshold of £9,000. Universities will be able to set their own fees however, those Universities seeking to charge more than £6,000 will have to increase their efforts to attract students from lower-income families. To support those on lower incomes a £150 million National Scholarship Programme has been announced to which upper threshold universities will be expected to contribute funds.
In addition, graduates will not be required to repay any money until they have reached an income of £21,000, £6,000 higher than the previous threshold. This means that many lower-income students will be better off under the new arrangements which the National Union of Students and others fully accept. Only those students earning above £41,000 will repay at the full rate so again, this is a better offer than has been made before. Further to this, it will be the case that part-time students would have equal access to Student Loans just as fulltime students have which again represents a better deal than currently exists.
I raise the points above because they have often not been made clear to people when looking at the national headlines. These changes mean that the system will be far more progressive in helping those on lower incomes, than has been the case to date.
Having been a student myself I remember all too well the system that used to exist where those who overran their grants or did not receive sufficient support from their parents would run up overdrafts, often at fifteen or twenty percent in interest. Whilst the system then had some merit, it did not require many students to actually contribute to their education from which they would inevitably enjoy a substantially higher income.
This is a very difficult decision to take. As a new Government we have inherited a substantial deficit and it means that everybody is having to contribute more to balance the books. I personally believe that under graduates should contribute towards the cost of their education, not least because it will often lead to substantially higher incomes than would otherwise be the case. Further to this, I do not believe it is fair that those older people who have not had the benefit of a university education should subsidise younger people who will.
Cont’d/……
07 December 2010
I also believe that it is time we struck a better balance between a university education and vocational skills. The last Government actively encouraged young people to believe that only a university education would suffice. This has been enormously detrimental both to many young people for whom university simply isn’t right and the economy in starving us of people with the appropriate technical and vocational skills needed. So, whilst I appreciate the points that have been raised by a number of people I shall be supporting the Government’s proposals with regards to Higher Education and Tuition Fees.
Yours sincerely
Mark Prisk MP
(dictated by Mark Prisk and sent on his behalf)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)