Tag: letters

Letter: Trick or treat?

Dear Editor

The announcement by Cameron that pensioners’ incomes will be protected from inflation for the “life of the next Parliament” sounds okay, you may think, but then what?

There is no doubt that other ‘benefits’ as he says, will be cut; from whom? The younger working people struggling now to make ends meet or perhaps the pensioners bus pass or winter fuel allowance?

The typical playing off one section of people against another is being demonstrated by the false highlighting of ‘affluent’ pensioners living it up (they even play bowls or are dancing!)

The question then arises what level is considered affluent and who sets that level. Having experienced over the last four years their idea of ‘level’, we can guess.

Pensioners and people at work must not be taken in by these attempts to get them to blame each other. Pensioners are mums and dads, workers are sons and daughters. Unity is Strength.
Tony Delahoy (by email)

Letter: say ‘no’ to pig factory farm

Dear Editor

It has taken many years of public pressure to get improved conditions for factory-farmed chickens, even after their horrendous treatment was exposed.

The vast majority of people who agree all animals should be treated with care will be horrified to learn of a proposal being put to Derbyshire County Council by Midland Pig Producers for permission to build a vast pig factory to confine 25,000 pigs until ready for slaughter. It is well known that pigs are highly intelligent outdoor animals and they would seriously suffer being confined, whatever conditions apply.

This way of treating animals must be resisted and stopped. Please write, email or fax Derbyshire County Council asking them to reject the application.

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens 

Letter: Horror Picture

Dear Editor
I am writing to express my horror at the sale of the Picture House to Wetherspoons. This iconic venue for live music is potentially to be replaced by yet another place to eat and drink.  This city needs to rebalance its priorities – particularly for young people.
We wonder why some young people are so disconnected and cynical when they are not consulted about things that matter to them? I recognise that this is a private transaction however I have written to the council asking some questions about this situation and what can be done via planning, etc.
The good news is that young people are not sitting back. They have set up a petition. Link attached – see below
As a recently elected Community Councillor for Granton & District  I am delighted to be associated with this and hope through NEN this issue will be published and supported.
Dave Macnab
Granton & District Community Councillor
The Picture House

Letter: Socialist solution to self-interest

Dear Editor

We are living in a capitalist society where most places of work are privately owned, in which the first priority is to maximise profit. The owners are also free to close down places of work if they feels profits are not enough, regardless of the effect on the workers and their families.

By it’s very nature the capitalist system is based on the owners’ self-interest, whether dealing with national workforces or international workforces.

Modern technology and knowhow is now able to solve the scourge of starvation, poverty and ill-health worldwide, but owners of industries are not willing to set aside their self-interest.

The capitalist system has amassed unbelievable wealth but in the UK cannot or will not solve the problems of jobs, housing, pensions, health, care of the elderly, education and social services. They cannot or will not treat the preventable diseases that kill millions of children worldwide for the sake of the few pence per head needed to do so.

In the knowledge of all this, the arrogance of language and policy used by political supporters in support of capitalism is breathtaking. Replacement of such a useless system is long overdue, being replaced by one working for the benefit of all – SOCIALISM.

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

 

Local group’s fury over ‘Bedroom Tax’ vote

North Edinburgh Women’s International Group has written to Labour leader Ed Miliband following a vote in the House of Commons last week:

Dear Mr Miliband

I am writing to you on behalf of North Edinburgh Women’s International Group  regarding reports in the  news that  46 Labour MPs failed to  turn up to the House of Commons  to vote for a motion  which  could have led to the scrapping of the bedroom tax.

We are unable to understand  how this situation could have come about.  We can only assume that the 10 Scottish MP’s who failed to vote were unaware of the 150% increase in people using foodbanks in Scotland during the last year as a result of the current programme of welfare reforms.    They  must also be unaware of  the warning from Shelter  that “for many, the safety and security of a home is under threat like never before.”

We understand that  Labour’s motion on  the scrapping of the bedroom tax was defeated by only 26 votes.  We would have thought that the  recommendation by the UN  Special Rapporteur  on Housing  calling for the bedroom tax to be suspended immediately would have had an impact on  members of the Labour Party.   This does not appear to have been the case.

We were under the impression that an important part of an MP’s job involves turning up to their workplace (ie the House of Commons) and  voting on issues  which affect the people  they represent.  We  believe that 46 of your Party’s MPs   have not been doing their job and we find this completely unacceptable.

The inaction of these MP’s demonstrates  that the Labour Party does not represent the interests of ordinary people.  It also suggests that the Labour Party does not care about the suffering and hardship experienced by many families as a result of the bedroom tax.

We are interested in finding out what the Trade Union Movement’s response is to the inaction of  the 46 MP’s who represent the Party which they fund.

We are disgusted, angry and disheartened at what has become of the Labour Party. It  is no longer the Party of  ordinary people.   Your Party has taken working class people’s votes for granted.  You  have insulted our intelligence by assuming that people would  forgive and forget  this terrible betrayal.  This is a serious error which will cost the Labour Party at election time. The excuse of Labour MPs having been paired will not be accepted.

We look forward to your reply

Your sincerely

Anna Hutchison

On behalf of North Edinburgh Women’s International Group 

One week on, the group is still awaiting a response.

Cammy Day Ward 4 Forth Ward

Forth Labour Councillor Cammy Day comments:

Responding to letter by the Edinburgh North International Women’s group

I agree with the Edinburgh North International Women’s Group in their letter dated 19th Nov in their deploring of the evil bedroom tax. As the deputy convenor of the Council’s Health, Social Care and Housing Committee I have seen first hand the damage it’s done,  but I think your letter unfairly puts the blame of the existence of the bedroom tax on the Labour Party. It was the Labour Party who voted against the introduction of the bedroom tax from the beginning. It was the Labour Party who has campaigned to bring an end to it and promised that a Labour government would scrap it right away. This policy was brought in by the Coalition Government, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives. They are the ones who made this unfair and pernicious tax, a law.
At Council level the Labour Party has prevented evictions in cases caused by the bedroom tax, something I was proud to be a part of in Edinburgh. At Holyrood they have voted against it and sought to bring in legislation to prevent it. I feel your letter leads people astray in their thinking, last week’s opposition debate by the Labour Party sought to highlight and reverse the government’s position. You are correct when you say that some Labour MPs did not vote for the motion. This was a result of pairing – where MPs from both opposition and government are paired when they cannot attend (either because they are ill, or because they have constituency or foreign business). This is part of our parliamentary system.
I hope you will reconsider your verdict on the Labour Party’s position on the bedroom tax. Only a Labour government in 2015 has committed to scrapping the bedroom tax and only a Labour government will continue the fight for the ordinary working class people you speak for. That’s why I am a member of the Labour Party and the trade union movement. We must stay together in this battle for a fairer society and show the coalition government of Liberal Democrats and Conservatives for what they damage the have done by legislating for the bedroom tax to exist in the first place and their wider attack of welfare reforms.
Cammy Day
Councillor – Forth Ward
Readers – it’s over to you! 

Letter: Making it work

Dear Editor

I wrote to NEN in 2010:

‘The struggle of the labour movement, trade unions and others has always been to ease the burden of work and to improve wages and conditions of work. It has been a long struggle, great sacrifices being made but always holding out the hope that, at long last, the nation will be able to look after the youngest – giving them all the care and opportunity needed, and giving the oldest respect, dignity and the care they need. This is how it should be and the nation will be judged accordingly.

‘Now despite all the evidence of the correctness of that struggle there are serious moves to undo the good. Raising the retirement age from 65 – to 68 initially, then later on to 70 – is a thoroughly backward move. I believe the majority of people, having worked for an average of fifty years, welcome relief from the daily grind. There should not, of course, be a compulsory retiring age if an individual wishes to continue working.’

It is now November 2013 and:

there is a situation where there are over one million young people out of work, and older people are told they will have to work for years beyond 65. This is creating new problems for the labour movement and the trade unions to solve: how can we tackle these problems and obtain the best results?

As a counter-proposal to raising the retirement age, I suggest an individual option lowering the retiring age to 62. The skills, knowledge and experience of those taking the option can be used for the benefit of their communities by agreeing to do a maximum of nine hours paid work for those three years.

No doubt this example will raise many questions and problems, but organisations representing working people must discuss what options there are and which are beneficial to all.

  • The scheme would release jobs for young people.
  • The skills and experience of the older person would be available to the community
  • The older person would have some work satisfaction, respect and dignity and a better quality of life
  • There would be a steady replacement of people taking part for the benefit of the community.

Comments and ideas needed!

Tony Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Letter: Offensive, Darling – bitter together

Dear Editor

I find it offensive that Alister Darling thinks that Scotland is not capable of self-government or of being a nation with full powers. How come small nations similar to Scotland can gain their independence and be successful, look after their people and economy without their neighbours ?

Lets look at what “Better Together ” has really done for Scotland. It has destroyed coal mining and ship building . It has given away our forests to the highest bidder,and our fisheries were sold down the river. Our whisky is taxed to the hilt . Gas, electricity,water and now the Royal Mail have all been privatised,but not for the benefit of ordinary people. Our hospitals ,schools and care homes can’t cope because budgets are cut year in, year out .
Scotland’s oil has been squandered to the extent that Mr Darling and his ilk say it’s running out, yet we are assured by experts there are still ample oil reserves. Denis Healey admitted to the people of Scotland that they were lied to in the 1970s about the oil supply running out then. New oil fields are being opened daily , weekly, monthly.
Under “Better Together ” Scotland has nothing – it all goes to Westminster! Our old , young unemployed , disabled ,  vulnerable are being driven into deeper poverty by a ‘better together’ UK Great Britain, whether you are a Tory, Labour or Lib/Dem.
As for George Osbourne telling the Scottish nation that should we get independence we would not be able to use the pound sterling? Have any Scottish people tried to exchange Scottish monetary notes in England ? It’s near impossible!
Another myth is having to use a Scottish passport to travel to England? Passports are not required to travel to the Republic of Eire. Yes identification is required but not necessary a passport.
As for defence Better Together have used their savage cuts to the MOD therefore Scotland has seen their regiments disappear. Teresa May’s recent comment that Scotland would be a target for terrorism. Scotland has been attacked once . We are more than capable of defending our country. How many times has England been attacked? Go back to the 1970s and as recent as the London bombings in 2012.
Any other nations who have gained their independence have never asked to be returned to their original countries.If the people of Scotland want more welfare cuts, ruled from Westminster, job losses, and unfair  treatment of our nation , then I dare you never to be poor, ill, young, unemployed  or old.
The Better Together  campaign are scaremongering our nation. Scottish people have to realise that in the referendum we are NOT voting for any political party but to have the right to rule our own country . All I have heard from political parties has been the back stabbing of Alex Salmond for suggesting we can achieve independence . Joanne Lamont is one of the worst offenders. Having listen to her at the Labour Party Conference she put down Alex Salmond 23 times . ” Better Together “?  More like “Bitter Together!”
Finally just to inform people I do NOT vote SNP – however I do  want independence.
Stand up, Scotland and be a proud nation!
Anna Hutchison (by email)

Letter: Time, gentlemen, please

Dear Editor

People over decades have had to struggle very hard to get an increase in wages; the employers, when faced with a determined workforce, do eventually make some concessions.

The one thing they strongly resist is a reduction in working hours: the weekly wage they pay has bought your ‘time’, and the more work that can be had from that ‘time’ the greater amount pf profit can be made, whereas any increase in the wage bill can be clawed back in rising prices.

Development in technology over the decades has meant more can be produced using fewer people, so the logical thing to do was to reduce the working week/year so that all could benefit – but no way would the employers reduce working hours: your ‘time’ was paid for by the weekly wage.

Now in the 21st century the employers are taking things further, embracing zero contracts where your ‘time’ is now on-call as and when needed, your ‘time’ that is left is not their concern as it is unpaid but remains tied to their needs. How close is this to serfdom or tied slavery?

Think about it. Today the call is for everybody to work harder and longer. Where, how and why? And for whose benefit?

Further, in spite of the nation’s will to finance national schemes to help those who are unemployed, sick or disabled in their time of need, this Tory/Lib government have planned to make them work for nothing or lose benefit.

Imagine the delight of some employers, having this pool of free labour available! Perhaps you may think it wouldn’t happen, but maybe this Tory/Lib government would reinstate poor law relief officers dishing out food vouchers, etc. instead of benefit money. It would be in character!

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Letter: public services paying the price

Dear Editor

Wage increases restricted to 1% maximum. Price increases averaging 3%, with gas, electricity and rail fares rising even more. This is not a one-off, it is a policy continuation over the last three years. Every working person is feeling the pinch, more so those on low incomes – in very many households the question of heating the home is decided by how much cold one can stand first.

Passing the cost of the colossal greed and mismanagement by the banks and financial institutions onto the people is bordering on criminal – especially as huge salaries and bonuses are still being paid to the people at the top, Their political supporters have been very busy making sure the people pay, but that is not enough for them.

They have also seized the chance to break up, privatise and destroy as many public services as possible – the very services, both local and national, that are needed more than ever. These services have been struggled for and paid for in taxation; they haven’t been given to us, this begs the question: how has the Tory/Lib government been able to do so much harm to so many?

First, any resistance had to be broken or diverted, pointing out people to blame, setting one section against another – those in work (‘hard workers’) against those out of work (‘layabouts’), people not on benefits against those on benefits (‘scroungers’), disabled people (‘shirkers’, or ‘work shy’). That so many people were taken in by these tales is a disaster, not only for the scapegoated but because every individual is under the same threat.

Emboldened by this success the Tory/Lib government felt confident enough to go even further and dictate how much space a hame needs (the ‘bedroom tax’) and in doing so giving the like-minded controllers licence to dictate, if on benefits, what people should or should not buy.

It is important every person listens very carefully to what is being told to them and why, and by defending others’ rights you defend your own. 

The famous speech by Pastor Neimoller is really worth recalling:

First they came for the communists

And I did not speak out because I was not a communist

Then they came for the socialists

and I did not speak out because I wasn’t a socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists

and I did not speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist

Then they came for me

and there was no one left to speak for me.

Most people have one asset, the ability to work; when the opportunity to exercise this is denied it has disastrous consequences on individuals and families, made worse by destroying public services.

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Letter: Social Profit

Dear Editor

The economic crisis was created by financial institutions and the banking systems, and they and their political supporters are now passing the cost onto the working population: cutting jobs, freezing wages and raising prices – causing widespread poverty and despair, not only in the UK but world-wide. This clearly shows their determination to protect themselves by any and all means.

All history shows that systems change: serfdom, feudalism, early capitalism, industrial capitalism to today’s financial capitalism. Each system in turn created problems they were unable to solve, but those who stood to gain most from the existing system strongly resisted any change.

The common factor of all these systems was that they were organised mainly for the benefit of the few. Today, the same is happening: financial capitalism moves money around the world to maximise their profits irrespective of the poverty created in country after country. As a system it can only operate in this way, engaging in what they call the ‘global race’ – this is fully backed by David Cameron.

A change of system is now needed, but it cannot be plucked off the shelf – effecting a change will involve everyone with ideas and determination to organise a social system to cater for the needs of all for life.

The NHS is one example of such social policies that can be ut into place, which everyone must defend alongside other social policies that exist. Social policies should include, for example: Rail, bus and air transport; gas electricity and oil suppliers, house building, care and security for the elderly and no privatising of schools.

Companies who own and control these indispensible industries operate for maximum profit at our expense: if operated socially it would bring about changes in the system.

Tony Delahoy

Silverknowes View