Skip to main content

100 Days

There is nothing really key about 100 days. It is a purely arbitrary point at which to assess a government.

However, one key assessment is what the interest rate is on government debt. The figures from Bloomberg today are:

UK (10 year) 3.037
Ireland (10 year) 5.236
Greece (10 year) 10.692
Germany (10 year) 2.353

That affects in the long term how much money is available for public services. Labour's strategy of don't cut so much in the short term leads to larger cuts in the Long term.

In the mean time the Coalition government is working to make the UK a nicer place to live. The banning of demanding money with menaces (aka car clamping on private land) is a good example of that. Yes people may still have to pay penalty charges, but the behaviour of so many clamping operations has been totally unacceptable.

Comments

PoliticalHack said…
Actually, there's no evidence to support the assertion that no cuts now means deeper cuts in the long term. The cuts are to remove the structural deficit, which is itself a volatile figure based on modelling, rather than an actual, solid number. Should the recovery be faster and the tax take increase, then deeper cuts may not be necessary.

While I'm broadly supportive of removing the right of clamping firms to threaten people with demands for extortionate sums, we do need a balance that allows people to secure their own property.

It is good to know that the country is getting better every day. Thousands will lose their jobs, some their homes and people's income will decrease, but at least they won't be clamped in their cars (assuming they can still afford them).
john said…
From an economic perspective there are slightly different approaches being taken in different countries so it will be possible to take a retrospective look at things as well as prospective.

However, the evidence is in the sovereign debt yields.

Obviously things are bad for some people, but that was inevitable even if your leader has stayed in power.

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men: