Shannon Matthews
Is it me or is this whole case turning in to a sad reflection of the quality of family life in Britain under New Labour?
Here we have one of the poorest parts of the country where it seems close relatives kidnap children and a web of deception seems to encompass and spread throughout the family. As a by-line step fathers are downloading child pornography. Where will this case go next?
Is this really what Britain is like under Brown's Britain?
Shannon Matthews: mother and sister of Craig Meehan arrested - Times Online
9 Responses »
Leave a Response
Entries(RSS)
Sadly it may lead to yet more horrors and subjects that most people find inexplicable.
No fan of Brown,but even I cant blame him this type of family structure is now in its 2/3rd generation.
As a country we have denigrated any normal family unit by imposing higher taxes and promoting un-natural practices including but not limited to IVF etc for same sex couples and fostering children into bizarre "families" whilst persecuting those who hold "old fashioned views" about discipline and religion.
I quite frankly find it appauling that you make a political issue out of such a sad case. If you think this is the norm for most people from a poor background then you have just done us all a favour by proving exactly how out of touch the Conservative Party really is. Thank you, Kevin.
I am afraid that I cannot agree with Lee. This is a political problem because we are now reaping the rewards of generations of neglect of families and family life.
It is this Government that is out of touch with what it is really like for many fractured communities up and down this country. Brown has increased their tax by scrapping the 10p rate of tax. Instead he has given them a complicated mix of tax credits with which to survive.
I do not say that the Matthews family is typical but I do believe it acts as a metaphor for the challenges that the next Conservative Government has - once we get rid of Brown.
If Labour really cared they would stop throwing money at eye catching initiatives and spend money encouraging families to stay togeher, they should stop spending billions on just sticking up school buildings, and thinking that will cure the problem of our dreadful education record, and instead invest in smaller class sizes. Instead of tying people to the state we should be doing more to mend society instead.
This Government talks big on child poverty and yet it has one of the poorest records on child poverty. There are 3.8 million children (one in three) who are living in poverty, one of the worst records in the industrialized world. They have had 11 years to put ion place measures to prevent child poverty and thy have failed to do so.
And it is not just me who thinks this, read this front page today to see what those who deal with the fall out of Browns busted society think:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=557377&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
What you’re actually talking about when saying you encourage families “staying together” is offering tax breaks to the nuclear family unit and leaving single parent families out in the cold without financial support from the government. It is sad that there are more broken homes now, but I would never advocate a system which makes it harder for people in unhappy relationships to make a break and to start a new life. In some cases, for example where women are being physically abused, this just makes it that much harder for them to leave. And lets face it, things are easier with two adults earning money in a household than having a single parent carrying the entire financial burden. These are the people we should be helping as they are the ones who need it most.
There are problems to solve with education and I certainly wouldn’t advocate this to be a perfect system. But it is better than it was, the class sizes are smaller, the school buildings are up to date and no longer crumbling and cold, there is modern technology being introduced right across the board so as to enhance the learning experience of children everywhere. I have had the benefit of working for a short time in a Yeovil school and I have seen first hand the children benefiting from the changes which have come about as a result of Labour Party policy in the past decade. And no, there were no classes of more than about 25 children.
As for child poverty… it is schemes such as the tax credit system which have directly helped to lift so many people from the poverty line. I will say that the gap between rich and poor may have increased, but there are less people living on the poverty line today than there was in 1997. It is easy to throw around the word “poverty” but I tell you there is a difference between being in poverty and being on a low income. Now there is assuredly lots of people in the area I live in on low income, but I wouldn’t say one in three of them were in poverty. But you are right to mention child poverty, as long as there is one child suffering somewhere it is one child too many.
The Labour government was the first government to truly acknowledge child poverty for the problem it really is. It was this Labour government which pushed it up the political agenda, brought this issue into full public view and set some very ambitious targets for which to hold itself to account. Our goal has not been achieved in its entirety, but if you honestly think the Conservatives would make a better job of it you are sadly mistaken. The adoption of Conservative policy would set this country back years. Contrary to the opinion of your party, the solution to these things is not adopting the Wisconsin model for welfare reform, which would ultimately directly effect and make poorer the exact people you’re talking about helping.
And I appreciate the link but we simply can’t believe the word of a reactionary hate-filled newspaper such as the Daily Mail. Need I point out that they are being took to court for the biased trash they print? Also, if you look at the blog of our candidate, Paul Smith, you'll see a post printed a few weeks ago showing an email from the Daily Mail which aptly demonstrates my above point.
Very eloquent Lee,but do you have any ideas on how to improve matters?
I am no fan of the Daily Mail which I do read to give me an insight into other worlds and it seems to me they have valid points that are unfortunately expresse so poorly and with such venom that sensible debate becomes impossible. Bit like my old MP Enoch Powell whose intellect blinded him to how the gutter press and fanatics would see his views.
The creation and retention of wealth must be encouraged for it allows choice and gives employment across the "socio economic" groups,horrible words but now really means all who work.
Crazy taxes aimed at all workers is madness as it discourages the workshy to find anything meaningful to do and produces whole succesive generations who have never worked and who find it acceptable to sponge off society.
How to solve?
1/Instead of prison for the fit and ruthless how about serving the term in the armed forces with no criminal record afterwards?
They may even become skilled in trades that encompass driving to computer skills etc.
2/Perhaps the Churches could give some positive messages instead of the waffle one gets from the Arch of Canterbury.
3/My school classes were never less than 40 and usually 45,we were however streamed and told a fulfilling life was only possible with a good education and being a good citizen.Face the front sit up straight and work your hardest.Sounds a bit old fashioned now but it seemed to work in the 50s/60s.
4/Benefits must be withdrawn from those who are fit and who claim disability benefit,can 50% of under 35s claimants really be so unfit?
5/Child poverty is nothing compared to old age poverty,where sickness combines with official disinterest and punitive measures such as prison for a minor council tax debt.
The creation of wealth is important, but undoubtedly we would disagree on what then to do with this wealth. I would have it redistributed to those who need it most, I suspect you would disagree. Encouraging people into work though is very important as everyone has a responsibility to contribute to society in some way, shape or form. I am not sure what you define as crazy tax, but I don’t think our present system of income tax is all that crazy.
And before you mention it, yes I do agree that something should be done about council tax. However we all have a responsibility to each other, this is what ‘society’ is about contrary to the nonsense claims of Thatcher that society doesn’t even exist. What would solve the problem of discouraging the work shy from returning to work is to give tax breaks to those on lower incomes. The money could easily be made up by taxing those at the very highest income levels. I’m not talking about middle earners earning anywhere between £20,000 to £40,000 a year paying over 40% taxation, which I think is fair already, but potentially introducing an additional tax bracket for those earning in excess of something in the region of £60,000 p/a and more.
I don’t think sending petty criminals to the army is the answer. I do think that would be a violation of their civil liberties, as you are potentially denying them a right to life by sending them to places like Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere where death is a real possibility. I think you’re on the right track though. The prison system should only be used as a last resort for dangerous criminals, career criminals and just generally anyone who poses a threat to other human beings. I would recommend more extensive use of house arrest and as you mention rigorous training schemes and education in combination with community service. It is fact that more crime is committed by those in poverty and those in desperation than anyone else. Everyone has the ability to better themselves via education. I think the Labour government has been right to push education and to make it more accessible because it has a direct impact on crime.
Kevin, I understand you may be a Christian and I don’t mean to be disrespectful but I don’t think religion has any role to play when it comes to matters of state and government.
As for disability benefits, yes I know damn well some people abuse the system and that must be stopped. It is unfair to everyone else who has to work and pay taxes. But disability applies to more than just physical ailments, but also mental ones. We often throw the word ‘depression’ about an awful lot but real depression can be crippling. It is also really hard to get treatment for mental issues on the NHS. There is something in the region of a 6 month waiting list for psychiatric help. While many advances have been made in the field of healthcare and to the NHS in general, the NHS situation with regards to mental illness is still not good enough. If we improve the facilities offered here too I think crime will fall. A lot of crime is also committed by the mentally ill. The Conservative ‘care in the community’ scheme may have been a good idea in principal but it wasn’t backed up with the appropriate funding. We are still feeling the effects of this today. Though in all fairness the Labour Party could have and should have took greater steps to improving the situation on this front.
As for prison for council debt, I find that really bizarre and I don’t understand why people have been imprisoned for non-payment of council tax. I believe it is a civil debt, not a criminal one? Please correct me if I am wrong. However sending people to prison for such things is absolutely crazy and I am sure the Labour government realises this. Poverty amongst the elderly has been given a lot more attention since 97. We have winter fuel allowances now as well as free public transport throughout all of England for those over 65. That may seem like a minor thing but have you took a Yeovil bus lately? It costs near £3 to get to town and back. If you do that 3 times a week you’re looking at nearly £10 of your pension.
That last post was meant to be directed at mojoman, not you Kevin. I should perhaps wear my glasses before starting to type.
Actually Lee there are many things that you and I probably agree on.
But as we learnt in the 70's, and are learning again now, for there to be a system of benefits and support for the less well off there needs to be those who create wealth and pay taxes. Punitive taxation has been proved to dissuade wealth creators and the consequence is that the poor suffer.
I will however defend Margaret Thatcher. The quote you give is used often by the left to denigrate the many things Thatcher did to improve this country - even Blair and Brown accept that! On society, what she actually said was:
"And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation."
I do not believe this interview gives the slant some place on it. What it is saying is that society is made up of individuals and families and it is only through them that there is the capacity to support the less well off. In the first instance individuals and families should look for support from within themselves but then understand, if they turn to the state for support, that it can only be given because others have given.
Lee, it just shows that most of us want what is FAIR,regardless of which Party they may support.
It is just we rarely seem able to agree on how to fund or evaluate what needs doing and the same section of society always seems to be treated as a cash cow by both local and state government.
I know I am right of centre and its probably down to being a Brummie from a hard working staunch Tory Black Country family.Oddly my father in law was a Welshman from a business owning family but was firmly Old Labour,despaired of TB and in the end we often ended up agreeing on almost everything that needed doing,just not on how to get there.