Poor thought has to be challenged.

Whenever Governments change, there is always a slow but discernible change in political culture.  Some things that had been taken for granted subsequently become questioned and new 'truths' are developed.  Many people reading today's headlines concerning an increase in the number of people living in poverty:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-15242103

will naturally be appalled by story and will automatically make the link between the removal of Government support and the drop in quality of people's lives.  A growing number, however, will do their best to blame anyone but those responsible.

When this story broke on the BBC, I noticed that there was a debate about it on a message board that I occasionally contribute to.  One person was falling over themselves to absolve the Government from any blame, stating that "poverty doesn't happen in one year".  Well, yes it does.  It can happen very quickly.  There are countless stories of people suffering job loss, illness, accidents or other personal tragedies which have signalled a startlingly accelerated descent into poverty and misery.  Taking away someones livelihood is akin to taking away their liberty.  Governments are effectively treating people in the same way that prisoners are treated and the knock on effects are awful.  Children are often the ones who suffer most, from the simple if sad reality that their parents cannot afford the same treats and presents that others get, right up to having to wear clothes that are long past their use-by date, making them and their situation an obvious target for their mean spirited contemporaries.

Reading more of the message board, I was struck by one comment which denied the very existence of poverty on the basis that "they've all got plasma tv's and playstations".  Now unless someone has visited every household in the country, that sort of remark is ignorant at best and just plain stupid at worst.  However, we live in a time when this kind of comment can be passed off as accurate.  The only people who benefit from this kind of stupidity are those who stand to gain from poverty.  There are employers who gleefully welcome high unemployment as it means they can drive wages further and further down; the increase in the number of people needing Housing Benefit is sometimes a green light to unscrupulous landlords to increase rent;  some Tory M.P.'s delight in compounding the situation by blaming the poor themselves, making out that, despite having the worst possible start in life, they can miraculously transform their situation by working harder.  To paraphrase Ed Miliband, it's a mistake to suggest that you make the rich work harder by making them richer and the poor work harder by making them poorer.

This change in the political culture has had other effects, too, with institutions that have been cherished for years suddenly becoming battlegrounds.  A theme that was in vogue earlier this year concerned libraries.  As Local Government budgets were slashed, libraries found themselves on the receiving end, with all kinds of right wing nuts coming out of the woodwork to wield the axe.  One debate on Radio 4 centred around whether we need libraries at all.  They could all be closed, said one guest, as Charity Shops sell books.  Leaving aside his stunning ignorance about the type of books available in your local Cancer Research (and the fact that there are more books available in wealthier areas compared to poorer areas), he built on this idiocy by then suggesting that books themselves were no longer necessary.  A Kindle for all was his solution.  When it was suggested that these items can be very expensive, his idiotic response was that "poor people can be given a Kindle".

Yes, we now live in a society where stupid right wing ideas can be brought out into the open.  After keeping them under wraps for a decade, we're now subjected to anti-social ideas on a daily basis.  Of course the Daily Mail and Daily Express have been hammering away at such themes for years.  The problem for them is that no-one ever took them seriously.  Now, however, there is a danger that when extreme views are put forward, they act as a Trojan Horse for something equally obscene.  Okay, we won't close your library - we'll just sell off half the books.

It's up to those of us who value our social institutions and who sympathise with those in terrible situations to speak out.  It's no good crossing our fingers and hoping that everything works out for the best.  The sort of offensive ideas that this Government floats - changes to Employment Law, scrapping the Human Rights Act, changing planning laws unfairly - need to be challenged at every opportunity.  If not, today's nutty idea becomes tomorrow's palatable truth and next week's Government policy.

It's not constructive - just unfair

Political Parties like to play to their own crowds.  Pre-conference tasters excite the media, party members and those of us who follow the political world on a regular basis.  Some snippets, though, creep below the radar and deserve more comment or analysis – or perhaps downright suspicion.

One such piece was smuggled out into the news in recent days.  Under the guise of creating a more ‘business friendly’ culture, George Osborne has suggested a change to the law governing constructive unfair dismissal.  This, it’s argued, would make it easier for businesses to hire and fire people and get the economy moving again.  This seems like a minor change to a small piece of legislation which won’t have much effect on anyone.  But wait.  Let’s look at the details.  It may surprise you to know that Mr Osborne is not giving us the whole story.

The legislation in question relates to people being sacked.  At the moment, an employee has to have been at a company for twelve months before they can take the company to court if they feel they have been unfairly treated.  In short, if someone has been working for you for 11 months, you can get rid of them without justification and that employee has no legal rights to sue you.  The Conservatives want to extend this.  They want the time an employee has to have worked for a company before full legal rights kick in to two years.

What we are NOT talking about here is people being fired for wrong doing; nor are we discussing people who are incompetent; nor are we discussing those who are negligent.  We are talking about people who have done everything asked of them and whom companies have chosen to fire without reason.  Companies can and should be able to fire those who have broken the rules, seriously messed up or damage the organisation in some other way, no matter how long the person has worked there.  But to fire someone for no reason?  That is and always should be grossly unfair.

Osborne thinks this will make it easier to hire people.  Really?  Well, I suppose you can hire someone different every 23 and a half months, presumably at a starting salary, thus scrimping on a few pounds.  That is, if you want to be thought of as a rotten employer who does the dirty on their hard working staff.  Those who welcome the proposed change should exercise caution – do they really want to be thought of in those terms?

Is this seriously what the Conservatives think of business?  That they want legislation to allow them to throw scruples, along with good people’s livelihoods, out of the window?  If so, they have a very poor view of those in commerce.  After all, there are plenty of encouragements the Government could give to business – a national Insurance holiday for those employing new staff; a months benefit paid to firms taking on long-term unemployed; an export credit guarantee similar to that it provides to the arms trade.  Allowing firms to sack people with no good reason and without any comeback is a return to the nasty party Theresa May once described – if, that is, it ever went away.