Theresa May is saying this morning that she is going to lead a party committed to social justice. These were my Twitter responses:
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I’ll add another: Social justice does not involve £35bn of social security cuts (adding together the Coalition govt’s cuts with the current Tory govt’s cuts).
Agreed
As I do with other suggestions
I could only do so many before going out this morning with the tribe
One to add: Social Justice does not involve having to fill 50-page forms to claim what people are entitled to.
I’d never have put May-hem down as being a comedienne. Appears I’m wrong.
brilliant and so accurate.Thank you.
You also add that social justice requires a fair benefits assessment system – one that does not sanction disabled people leaving them penniless for weeks on end when they are entitled. Also a benefits system that is run for equitable treatment of claimants and government and not just for private profit.
Agreed
I could not do everything by 8.30 when the tribe and I headed out for the day
Social justice requires the removal of the Tories.
I don’t do Twitter but thumbs up for all of those Tweets. Talk is cheap – and the Tories are cheapskates except when it comes to their own tribe and cronies. The country is in desperate need of genuine, heart-felt social justice such as you have succinctly identified. If Theresa May really meant what she says she wouldn’t represent the Conservative Party. Personally I find her hypocrisy and insincerity shameful. Or maybe she’s just ignorant.
Social justice?!!!!
Tripe!!
So, with Labour stymied, the Right steps in and yet again uses progressive rhetoric to makes themselves sellable to the public.
They don’t fool me.
Social justice means no middle class tax cuts in the form of increases to the personal allowance while austerity continues
Re. house of lords: currently one of the most important checks and balances in our society. Reform would be led by party in power. No reason to think abolition wouldn’t bring about something far worse.
I would create a different second chamber
This is a list many of us wholeheartedly endorse and has a great deal of impact set out in this way before anyone attempts to break it down or jump into the detail. It’s the outline of a big chunk of a political manifesto that unfortunately none of the major parties will write and it’s gratifying to observe that a number of the points themselves answer the inevitable, “that’s all very well, but how are we going to afford it?” challenge.
Good to see this, thanks.
I’d class May’s statements as the same sort of oral flattulence she burbbled out on taking office where she banged on about ‘we will look after you’ and ‘project bonds’ for infrastructure (which would have had a rentier component anyway).
When the pressure builds up she feels she has to mouth this garbage to make her party look less like the rapine obsessed buch of ghastly time-servers and rip-off artists that they are.
Expect business very much as usual.
I can’t see the point of Twitter:o(
I can’t see the real point of Facebook
We each find our own media
So much ammunition with which to attack this government. Yawning chasms between May’s claims and the reality of her policies. And yet the Opposition benches seem to be incapable of landing any effective blows.
I was at the Say You Want a Revolution exhibition at the V&A today, about the 1960’s – and yes I am a product of that era! It covers a lot more than art, fashion and music, and I was reminded of how much that was a bottom up revolt against the established power structures. Groups and organisations forming in civil society and elements of direct action. So perhaps its going to take civil society and a bit of direct action to change things in the UK today.
There have been a lot of parallels drawn between current times and the 1930s but maybe we could learn something from the 1960s as well?
Agreed
Ageing hippies have a lot to say in the current environment
Social justice requires a media that will tell the truth and not spin everything. Otherwise how do we know.
Agreed
Social Justice means state pensions are paid at the age agreed when n.i. Contributions have need paid in full
I’d qualify now
No chance!
You talk a lot of sense but you wrap your points in politics, which just like economics, isn’t evidence backed and therefore makes your points less compelling to those of us that are sick and tired of politics that solve nothing for no one.
Keep it business.
😉
Everything is politics
There is nothing else
Politics is increasingly looking like a busted flush. To say ‘everything is politics’ is frankly bonkers – if you spend time with working class people, the sort who voted leave, you’d soon find that they disagree with you. People up here in the north are sick of the empty promises made by politicians.
More like ‘everything is bust’.
The politics people are being offered may be bust – I could not disagree with that
But it’s absurd to say that means politics is bust
What that means is we need better and new politics or nothing will change. Is that what you want?
I want change but the truth is that I can’t see it being forged by politicians. I can however see it being forged by enlightened business people who can meet the needs of an increasingly disaffected public.
Think of it as populism by business!
That’s crass
Business is about self interest
Politics is about the public interest
They’re utterly different
Small businesses make up the backbone of this country. how can you generalise so broadly? Do you know how many businesses there are in the uk and how many of them are small or medium?
You’re just another anti-business pro-politics campaigner. Nothing will change unless we take the politics out of decision-making and replace it with cold hard evidence.
I am a chartered accountant
I was senior partner of a firm with 800 clients
I have created businesses
So that’s utter nonsense
I just happen to know that business and politics are miles apart
And those who say otherwise are talking pure nonsense
And as a Professor of Practice in International Political Economy I like evidence too
Mike, small businesses are not the backbone of the country on their own. What about all those public services essential to the functioning of society that are provided by the state such as education, healthcare, law enforcement, maintenance of the physical infrastructure?
Sure, a large percentage of the population work for SME’s, and they are a significant part of the economy. To accuse Richard of being anti small business is ludicrous. Why do you think he has campaigned so vigorously against tax avoidance by big business, and the capture of government by neoliberal ideologues? Richard isn’t anti business, he simply wants a level playing field so that small business can compete fairly; in other words, he wants markets to function properly.
To be frank, you sound like one of those tight wingers who likes to say everything would function better if only businessmen ran everything. The kind of nonsense that great ‘non politician’ Farage comes out with.
Thanks
First point fundamental
The problem with politics Mike Riddell is that there are too many ex-businessmen/women in it (look at the biographies of many Tory politicians for example) who think that you run a country like a business (in other words using micro economic practices to make macro economic decisions).
This explains why the economy has tanked and our productivity is still shite even after the Thatcher ‘wonder’ years.
The creeping culture of business in state affairs such as how to look after its disabled and chronically sick citizens leads to crap like this from the Institute of Economic Affairs who see the problem as one of simple supply and demand – in this case thankfully and ably debunked by Welfare Guru Professor Paul Spicker:
http://blog.spicker.uk/the-iea-fails-to-understand-some-basic-facts-about-disability/
I respect business people enormously for their domain knowledge and when they use that knowledge within their domain. Unfortunately when they over reach themselves by trying to do statecraft with their business skill-set, any respect usually goes out of the window and rightly so in my view.
There is a role for the state.
As a commissioner of services.
SMEs should deliver the services whether for- or not-for profit.
Big business in an ideal world would be cut out of the commissioning process due to their inability to prove the social and business benefits that their style of business delivers.
I’m not left and I’m not right. I’m evidence led and the facts of the matter are that this system isn’t working for the vast majority of people and the longer we leave the solutions to politicians and CEOs of large companies the longer we’re going to see populism move to the right.
Respectfully, SMEs cannot run the NHS
It has over 1,000,000 employees for a start
You really are wasting our time here